UC-NRLF 


$B    b37    L.00 


PJ 

5019 

S82 

1901 

MAIN 


LIBRARY 


OF  THE 


University  of  California. 


RECEIVED    BY  EXCHANGE 


Class 


Cbe  Jewish 

l>  i  storico  -  Critical  School  of  the 

nineteenth  Century 


BY 


NATHAN  STERN,  A.M. 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR   OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  PHLLOSOPHY 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


i 


^w*- 


NEW  YORK 


MDOOOOl 


Che  Jewish 

l>i stori co -Critical  School  of  the 

nineteenth  Century 


BY 


NATHAN   STERN,  A.M. 


SUBMITTED   IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE   OF  DOCTOR    OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

COLUMBIA   UNIVERSITY 


OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 
&UJFOKN!J 


NEW   YORK 

MDOOOOI 


Sg2_ 
\°iC>[ 


4+. 


VITA 


The  author  was  born  February  12,  1878,  in  New  York.  He 
attended  the  Public  Grammar  School  No.  32  in  that  city,  Halsey's 
Collegiate  School,  and  Columbia  College,  from  which  he  was  gradu- 
ated in  1898  with  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of  Arts.  In  1899  he 
received  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts  from  Columbia  University. 

The  author  desires  to  thank  the  Eev.  Dr.  Gustav  Gottheil  and 
Mr.  Abraham  Guranowsky  for  generous  help  extended  to  him  in  his 
studies.  He  also  wishes  to  recognize  the  assistance  of  Mr.  Albert 
Porter,  of  the  staff  of  "The  Jewish  Encyclopedia,"  in  preparing  the 
manuscript  for  the  press  and  in  examining  the  proofs. 

To  Prof.  Kichard  J.  H.  Gottheil  the  author  is  indebted  for  many 
kindnesses,  and  for  having  placed  his  time  and  his  library  at  the 
author's  service. 


2 1 OlQn 


CONTENTS 


CHAP.  PAOB 

I. — Introduction        ........  1 

II. — Nachman  Krochmal   .......  6 

III. — Solomon  Judah  (Loeb)  Rapoport      .         .         .         .12 

IV. — Isaac  Samuel  Reggio          ......  24 

V. — Samuel  David  Luzzatto     ......  29 

VI. — Leopold  Zunz      ........  37 

VII. — Abraham  Geiger          .......  50 

VIII. — Zacharias  Frankel     .......  58 

IX. — Isaac  Marcus  Jost      . 63 

X. — Heinrich  Graetz          .                  67 

XI. — Moritz  Steinschneider 71 


Of   THC    ^ 

UNIVERSITY 

Of 


THE 

JEWISH  HISTORICO-CRITICAL  SCHOOL 

OF   THE 

NINETEENTH    CENTURY 


CHAPTER  I 

INTRODUCTION 


The  period  including  the  second  half  of  the  eighteenth  century 
and  the  whole  of  the  nineteenth  may  be  characterized  as  one  of  pro- 
test and  revolution.  There  prevailed  generally  a  yearning  for  freedom 
from  institutions  that  held  the  intellect  captive.  This  yearning  was 
experienced  by  the  Jew.  Having  had  practically  no  share  in  the 
outer  world,  he  devoted  all  his  energy  to  the  development  of  his 
religious  life  and  his  Talmudism.  The  claims  of  scientific  truth  were 
ignored  by  the  Rabbis ;  and  research  was  forbidden  by  them. 

The  Protestant  Reformation  was  a  revolt  against  ignorance  and 
the  tyranny  of  the  Church.  What  may  be  termed  "the  Jewish  Ref- 
ormation/' heralded  by  Moses  Mendelssohn  (1728-1786),  was  a 
reaction  against  medieval  survivals  within  the  Jewish  body,  and  a 
protest  against  the  sway  that  the  Jewish  faith,  in  the  form  of  -Cabala 
and  Rabbinism,  had  exercised  over  the  minds  of  its  adherents.  As 
within  Christendom  the  Protestant  Reformation  promoted  the  study 
of  the  sciences  and  the  encouragement  of  investigation  generally,  so 
throughout  Judaism  the  Jewish  Reformation  ultimately  produced  sim- 
ilar results. 

Mendelssohn  and  his  contemporaries  paid  little  attention  to  the 
critical  study  of  Jewish  history  and  literature;  but,  by  cultivating 
the  tastes  of  the  Jew,  by  introducing  him  to  modern  culture,  by 


acquainting  him  with  the  simple  instead  of  the  casuistic  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures,  by  the  reorganization  of  the  Jewish  schools,  and 
by  taking  the  first  steps  toward  the  emancipation  of  the  Jew  in  Ger- 
many, they  paved  the  way  for  its  introduction,  about  the  second 
decade  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

Economic  and  social  conditions  during  this  period  were  favorable 
to  the  new  method  of  inquiry.  During  the  Middle  Ages  the  Jew  found 
no  home.  He  belonged  to  the  state,  but  was  not  part  of  it.  Injury 
was  inflicted  upon  him  with  impunity.  As  the  times  became  more 
settled,  and  commerce  engrossed  the  attention  of  the  nations,  Hebrews 
were  granted  a  wider  toleration.  At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century  the  Jews  had  already  taken  an  important  position  in  the  com- 
mercial life  of  the  people  among  whom  they  dwelt.  Being  a  very 
active  race,  they  had  readily  adapted  themselves  to  existing  condi- 
tions. Some  had  found  their  place  in  the  ranks  of  labor;  others, 
more  enterprising  or  ambitious,  had  risen  high  and  made  their  influ- 
ence felt  in  the  social  and  economic  worlds ;  while  some  had  even  been 
the  recipients  of  royal  or  imperial  honors.  In  America  social  and 
political  equality  had  been  accorded  to  the  Hebrew ;  while  in  Europe 
the  French  Ee volution  and  the  Napoleonic  era,  by  abolishing  the  old 
conditions,  were  preparing  the  way  for  similar  privileges.  In  the 
short-lived  kingdom  of  Westphalia,  over  which  Jerome,  brother  of 
Napoleon  Bonaparte,  reigned,  the  Jew  was  given  in  1808  freedom  and 
equality  of  rights. 

The  impress  that  these  tumultuous  times  left  on  civilization  in 
general  and  on  Europe  in  particular  was  manifested  in  the  widening 
of  social  concepts.  With  the  passing  away  of  the  old  conditions 
the  Jew  rose  socially.  He  could  no  longer  be  considered  a  chattel 
of  the  state,  but  was  regarded  as  part  of  the  social  constitution. 
This  change  in  social  conditions  brought  about  an  increase  of  atten- 
tion on  the  part  of  governments  to  the  education  of  the  Jew.  At 
first,  special  schools  were  erected  for  him.  Later,  the  same  school- 
room was  used  simultaneously  by  Jewish  and  Christian  children, 
with,  however,  separate  benches  for  the  former.  Ultimately  this 
distinction  was  abolished,  and  school,  gymnasium,  and  university 
were  thrown  open  to  all,  irrespective  of  religion. 

In  the  school  and  in  the  university  the  Jew  was  brought  in  con- 
tact with  new  studies  and  new  influences.     The  history  and  literature 


of  other  peoples  were  systematically  taught,  with  the  result  that  the 
Jew  began  to  bring  system  into  the  study  of  his  own,  which  the 
scientific  spirit  of  the  age  had  not  yet  reached.  A  comparison  of 
what  he  learned  in  the  schools  with  what  he  had  been  taught  at  the 
synagogue  made  him  skeptical  of  his  tradition ;  for  in  many  instances 
this  tradition  did  not  harmonize  with  the  new  learning.  The  prob- 
lems, What  shall  be  and  what  shall  not  be  studied?  What  is  and 
what  is  not  sacred  ?  What  is  and  what  is  not  true  ?  were  considered 
in  a  new  light ;  resulting  in  a  complete  revolution  of  the  conception 
of  the  past,  and  in  a  thorough  and  an  effectual  reaction  against 
Cabala,  Hasidism,  and  Eabbinism. 

It  may  rightly  be  claimed,  however,  that  though  admission  to  the 
universities  stimulated  the  pursuit  of  knowledge  among  the  Jews  in 
Germany  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  among 
Jews  generally  in  the  second  half,  the  conditions  in  Austria  were 
not  such  as  to  warrant  the  assertion  that  university  life  was  an  impor- 
tant factor  in  the  inception  of  methodical  Jewish  study  in  Galicia. 
Though  public  schools  were  erected  for  the  instruction  of  Jewish  chil- 
dren, they  were  looked  upon  with  suspicion.  On  the  whole,  the 
Galician  Jew  preferred  to  pay  the  tax,  imposed  upon  all  who  refused 
to  send  their  children  to  such  schools,  rather  than  to  have  his  children 
instructed  in  the  secular  sciences.  It  was  owing  to  these  conditions 
that  Nachman  Krochmal  (1785-1840)  and  Solomon  Judah  Rapoport 
(1790-1867),  the  earliest  and,  perhaps,  the  greatest  of  the  Galician 
students,  had  to  pursue  their  secular  studies  under  many  difficulties. 
They  were  what  the  Germans  style  "autodidacten,"  and  never  at- 
tended either  public  school  or  university. 

To  have  produced  such  men  as  these,  there  must  have  existed 
another  element  besides  admission  to  the  higher  seats  of  learning: 
this  element  is  to  be  sought  for  only  within  the  Synagogue  itself. 
That  there  was,  indeed,  some  inherent  quality  in  Judaism,  which, 
developing  slowly  by  reason  of  obstruction  due  to  ignorance  and  mys- 
ticism, was  bound,  under  favorable  conditions,  to  assert  itself,  is 
evident  from  the  case  of  Elijah  Wilna  (1720-1797).  Living  in 
Poland,  surrounded  for  the  most  part  by  fanatics,  removed  from  all 
contact  with  a  highly  cultured  society,  Elijah  strove  to  effect  a  change 
in  the  intellectual  condition  of  those  about  him,  and  to  this  end 
exhorted  them  to  apply  themselves  to  the  study  of  the  secular  sci- 


ences.  The  impulse  that  actuated  Elijah  could  only  have  emanated 
from  within  Judaism;  and  it  was  the  same  force  that  impelled 
Krochmal  and  Eapoport  to  the  prosecution  of  their  studies. 

Briefly,  the  agencies  of  the  renaissance  of  Jewish  learning  may 
be  summarized  as  follows:  Economic  conditions  had  everywhere 
altered.  These  changes  in  the  economic  world  had  been  followed  by 
corresponding  changes  in  the  political  and  social  conditions  of  the 
European  nations  and  of  the  Jews.  These  in  turn  affected  the  intel- 
lectual status  of  the  Jew,  which  resulted  in  a  systematic  study  by 
him  of  his  past.  This  study  was  favored  by  a  slow  development 
within  Judaism  itself,  and  by  the  admission  of  Jews  into  the  schools 
and  universities.  In  short,  the  same  Zeitgeist  that  was  tending  toward 
the  emancipation  and  social  equality  of  the  Jew  was  impelling  him 
to  study  his  past  and  to  study  it  scientifically. 

The  field  to  be  worked  was  very  extensive,  and  difficult  as  well. 
Jewish  literature — understanding  thereby  not  only  compositions  of 
literary  value,  but  all  writings  on  Jewish  subjects,  whether  in 
Hebrew  or  in  other  languages — had  been  very  prolific.  During  the 
persecutions  of  the  Middle  Ages  many  literary  documents  and  his- 
torical sources  had  been  destroyed,  or  lost,  or  had  been  hidden  in 
libraries,  so  that  their  existence  was  not  known.  The  difficulty  lay 
not  in  the  want  of  material,  but  in  the  uncertainty  with  regard  to  the 
means  of  rediscovering  what  had  been  lost.  With  the  revival  of 
Jewish  learning,  the  libraries  throughout  Europe  were  ransacked  in 
search  of  manuscripts  that  might  assist  the  student  in  his  investiga- 
tions; and  constant  correspondence  having  a  similar  aim  passed 
between  Jewish  scholars  of  the  North  and  the  South,  of  the  East  and 
the  West. 

The  greatest  need  was  felt  in  the  department  of  history ;  for  the 
sources  upon  which  scholars  might  base  their  studies  were  compara- 
tively few.  So  sparse  indeed  were  the  historical  data,  that  Zunz 
found  it  necessary  to  begin  his  "  Literaturgeschichte  "  with  these 
words :  "  We  must  not  be  surprised  if  the  Jewish  Middle  Ages  can 
boast  of  no  historian.  A  nation  in  partibus  performs  no  feat :  her 
sufferings  may  produce  chroniclers  and  poets,  but  no  historian. 
Scientific  faculty,  yea  even  the  necessity  thereof,  was  wanting  for 
historical  investigation."  For  the  student  of  Jewish  history  these 
data  were  like  oases  in  an  extensive  desert.     They  were  not  histories 


In  the  general  sense  of  the  word,  but  annals ;  and  their  contents  were 
often  inaccurate  or  mere  strings  of  names  and  dates.  Some  of  them 
were  interwoven  with  fiction;  and  their  chronology  was  frequently 
adjusted  to  fit  some  preconceived  scheme.  Since  the  time  of  Josephus, 
no  really  authoritative  history  of  the  Jews  had  been  composed. 

Such  were  the  foundations  upon  which  the  student  of  history  had 
to  build.  His  work  was  by  no  means  easy.  He  had  to  proceed 
cautiouslv  in  order  to  find  the  facts ;  to  remove  the  accretions  that 
had  hidden  the  truth  during  many  years  of  exile.  Such  removal 
required  great  astuteness  and  critical  insight.  Men  were  not  lacking, 
however,  who  by  a  thorough  training  were  qualified  to  discriminate 
between  the  real  and  the  unreal,  to  separate  the  true  from  the  false. 
This  was  the  work  of  the  modern  school  of  critics.  Though  a  study 
of  history  was,  perhaps,  the  main  interest  of  this  school,  it  was  not 
the  only  one :  it  reviewed  what  had  been  done  in  all  the  departments 
of  Jewish  learning. 

This  activity,  once  manifested,  spread  rapidly.  Volume  after  vol- 
ume appeared.  Among  the  more  favorite  means  of  publishing  the 
results  of  study,  especially  the  working  out  of  details,  were  the  peri- 
odicals. At  first  these  were  few;  but  to-day  there  are  numerous 
journals  and  reviews  devoted  wholly  to  the  presentation  of  the  results 
of  Jewish  study.  This  activity  has  displayed  itself  in  other  forms. 
There  are  now  many  societies  whose  object  is  the  study  of  Jewish 
history.  Of  these  the  best  work  has  been  done  by  the  Commission 
fur  Geschichte  der  Juden  in  Deutschland,  the  Socie'te'  des  fitudes 
Juives  (Paris),  the  American  Jewish  Historical  Society,  and  the 
Historical  Society  of  England. 

The  present  dissertation  does  not  pretend  to  be  an  exhaustive 
study  of  the  work  of  the  modern  critical  school.  In  a  complete  ac- 
count, many  other  illustrious  names — Munk,  Dukes,  Sachs,  Low, 
I.  H.  Weiss,  Jellinek,  Cassel,  and  Kaufmann,  for  example — would 
have  been  included.  An  attempt  has  here  been  made  merely  to 
sketch  the  lives  and  to  present  a  brief  analysis  of  the  works  of  the 
foremost  scholars  and  authors  in  three  branches  of  this  school — 
the  Galician,  the  Italian,  and  the  German. 

Of  the  Galician  branch  Krochmal  and  Eapoport  were  by  far  the 
most  important.  They  were  the  pioneers.  Their  work  was  the  in- 
centive for  the  entire  critical  school;  their  method  of  criticism,  the 


study  of  their  successors.  Isaac  Samuel  Reggio  (1784-1855)  and 
Samuel  David  Luzzatto  (1800-1865)  are  the  representatives  of  the 
Italian  branch.  Having  come  into  closer  contact  with  the  results  of 
the  Italian  Eenaissance,  they  studied  the  art  of  presentation,  and 
purified  modern  Hebrew  style.  This  style  added  to  the  weight  of 
their  historical  and  critical  studies.  Of  the  three  branches,  the  Ger- 
man has  been  the  most  productive  and  the  most  far-reaching  in  its 
results.  Its  leaders  were  Leopold  Zunz  (1794-1886),  Abraham 
Geiger  (1810-1874),  Zacharias  Frankel  (1801-1875),  Isaac  Marcus 
Jost  (1793-1860),  Heinrich  Graetz  (1817- 1891),  and  Moritz  Stein- 
schneider  (born  1816).  By  their  works,  written  for  the  most  part 
in  German,  Jewish  learning  has  been  made  accessible  to  all;  and  for 
this  reason  the  work  of  the  German  branch  is  more  generally  known. 
Through  the  steadfastness  with  which  these  scholars  have  applied 
themselves  to  their  tasks,  and  the  thoroughness  of  their  study,  allied 
to  their  indefatigable  zeal  in  investigation,  their  astute  analyses,  and 
their  scientific  inductions,  the  history  of  Israel  has  been  presented  to 
the  world  in  a  manner  worthy  of  profound  consideration. 

CHAPTER   II 

NACHMAN    KROCHMAL 

Nachman  Krochmal,1  Biblical  critic,  historian,  and  philosopher, 
was  born  February  17,  1785,  in  Brody,  Galicia.  His  father,  a  mer- 
chant of  ample  fortune,  in  the  course  of  his  travels  to  Berlin  and  Leip- 
sic,  had  met  Mendelssohn  and  David  Friedlander,  and,  being  greatly 
impressed  by  them,  resolved  to  give  his  son  a  thorough  education. 
The  education  of  a  Jew  in  the  Galicia  of  his  day  was  confined  to  a 
study  of  the  Bible  and  the  Talmud.  In  this  study  Krochmal  excelled 
all  his  companions  in  the  rapidity  with  which  he  grasped  the  subject. 

In  his  fourteenth  year  he  was  married  to  a  Miss  Haberman,  of 
Zolkiev,  and  went  to  live  with  his  father-in-law.  This  change  of 
residence  was  beneficial  to  Krochmal,  as  it  hastened  the  maturity 
of  his  mental  faculties  and  broadened  his  intellectual  horizon.  In 
Zolkiev  he  had  at  his  disposal  the  library  of  Hirsch  New,2  a  district 

1  The  family  name  was  originally  "  Krochmalniq  "  and  was  later  shortened  by 
Nachman  (Zunz,  Gesammelte  Schriften,  ii.  150). 

2  Letteris,  Introduction  to  the  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman,  1863,  p.  15. 


teacher,  who  was  far  in  advance  of  his  environment.  Alone  Kroch- 
mal  studied  Arabic,  Syriac,  Latin,  German,  French,  mathematics,  and 
the  natural  sciences.  Philosophy  was  his  favorite  study.  Ibn  Ezra, 
Maimonides,  Spinoza,  Lessing,  and  Mendelssohn  were  his  favorite 
authors.  Kant  controlled  the  views  of  his  early  years,  but  soon 
yielded  place  to  Schelling,  Fichte,  and  Hegel,  each  of  whom  in  turn 
dominated  his  thought.  Notwithstanding  the  variety  of  the  subjects 
studied,  he  never  ceased  to  perfect  his  knowledge  in  the  Law  and  in 
Hebrew  literature. 

Excessive  study  and  neglect  of  his  own  personal  comfort  so  weak- 
ened Krochmal  that  he  never  fully  recovered  from  their  effects.  The 
Hasidim  ("  pious  ones  ")  said :  "  The  demons  have  hold  of  him ;  an 
evil  spirit  which  will  never  leave  him  terrifies  him ;  his  affliction  is 
due  to  too  intimate  an  acquaintance  with  idolatrous  books.  Hence 
he  goes  about  in  the  shadow  of  death;  and  the  image -of  God  has  left 
him." '  But  Krochmal  refused  to  yield  to  physical  weakness,  which 
he  regarded  as  a  divine  dispensation.  After  each  successive  attack 
had  spent  its  force,  he  arose  more  determined  than  ever  to  accomplish 
his  task.  He  dreaded  the  onslaughts  of  mystic  fanatics  considerably 
more  than  bodily  ailment.  Despite  much  opposition,  he  devoted  a 
great  portion  of  his  time  to  the  instruction  of  the  young.  His  repu- 
tation increased;  and  there  gathered  about  him  the  more  ambitious 
of  the  Galician  students.  To  all  he  gave  instruction  and  counsel  in 
the  branches  in  which  they  were  particularly  interested ;  for  he  was 
a  man  of  versatile  genius. 

After  the  death  of  his  mother-in-law,  in  1814,  he  was  compelled 
to  work  in  order  to  support  himself  and  his  family.  He  refused  to 
enter  the  miuistry.  Perhaps  his  ill  health  forbade  him ;  perhaps  also 
he  recognized  that  a  position  in  the  synagogue  was  not  in  keeping 
with  his  views.  He  wished  to  give  no  provocation  for  strife,  pre- 
ferring want  to  contention.3  "My  health  has  failed,"  he  wrote.' 
"  Evil  has  passed  over  my  head  these  last  few  years.  Not  long  since 
my  wife,  after  a  lingering  illness,  passed  away  [1826].  .  .  .  Deserted, 
I  remain  here  alone  with  my  youngest  child,  a  lad  of  ten.     My  eyes 

1  Letteris,  ibid.,  p.  16. 

8Zunz,  ibid.,  pp.  156,  168;  Letteris,  ibid.,  p.  23,  note  1, 
8 Letter  ii.  p.  65,  appended  to  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman;  Kerem  Itemed,  ii. 
109. 


8 

lift  themselves  to  heaven ;  whence  shall  come  my  help  ? "  His  re- 
maining strength  soon  gave  way,  and  he  was  compelled  to  seek  shelter 
with  his  daughter  in  Tarnopol.  Here  the  wise  men  gathered  around 
him:  he  was  their  leader;  his  home,  their  meeting-place.  He  died 
on  July  31,  1840,  and  was  followed  to  the  grave  by  most  of  the  Jew- 
ish population  of  the  city. 

Owing  to  excessive  humility,  to  bodily  infirmity  (which,  as  it 
increased  in  force,  rendered  intellectual  labor  more  arduous),  to  finan- 
cial straits,  and  to  the  attacks  of  fanatics,  Krochmal  wrote  but  little. 
He  seems  to  have  been  contented  to  teach  and  to  depart  from  life 
without  leaving  any  token  of  his  greatness  other  than  the  love  em- 
bedded in  the  hearts  of  his  pupils.  He  was  continually  rebuked  for 
his  avoidance  of  public  notice ;  and  one  of  his  admirers  called  '  to  him : 
"  Lo,  thou  art  great ;  great  things  has  thy  soul  discovered !  Shouldest 
thou  be  wise  for  thyself  alone?  Did  not  God  send  thee  here  to  give 
light  to  others  ?  "  Incessant  exhortations  ultimately  had  the  effect  of 
inducing  him  to  put  in  writing  some  of  his  thoughts.3 

Krochmal' s  first  articles  were  contributed  to  the  periodical  "Kerem 
Hemed,"  3  and  fully  confirmed  the  reports  of  his  scholarship.4  After 
their  appearance,  the  wise  man  maintained  a  stubborn  silence.  On 
his  death-bed,  he  reluctantly  produced  a  manuscript  which  was  to  be 
published  only  if  Zunz  would  consent  to  read,  arrange,  and  edit  the 
same.5  This  manuscript  was  the  product  of  a  life's  work.  Krochmal 
had  no  fixed  time  for  study  or  composition.  He  wrote  spasmodically ; 
now  on  one  theme,  now  on  another.6  Moreover,  he  was  very  irreg- 
ular in  his  work,  beginning  many  chapters  at  one  and  the  same  time.7 
No  one  chapter  is  complete ;  and  many  which  he  had  planned  were 
never  written,  death  preventing  their  completion.  The  editing  of 
such  a  manuscript  was  a  difficult  task;  but  Zunz  was  equal  to  it. 
He  prepared  the  work  for  the  printer,  and  published  it  (1851),  eleven 
years  after  the  death  of  the  author. 

1  Kerem  Hemed,  i.  74.  *lbid.,  vi.  491. 

zIbid.,  iv.  260,  v.  51,  which  later  found  their  place  in  the  Moreh  Nebuke  ha- 
Zeman.  Krochmal  also  contributed  to  the  Sulamith  (1818)  and  to  the  Zefira  (Zol- 
kiev,  1824).  *l.  H.  Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  113. 

5  This  manuscript  represents  all  of  Krochmal's  work.  After  his  death  a  care- 
ful search  was  made  ;  but  no  other  manuscript  was  to  be  found. 

6  Weiss,  ibid.,  pp.  114-115. 

7  Zunz,  Introduction  to  the  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman   1863,  p.  5. 


Krochmal's  purpose  in  writing  his  work  may  be  summed  up  in 
his  own  words :  "  If  to  any  of  my  readers  our  taste  appear  trilling — 
and,  perhaps,  he  may  regard  all  our  words  as  the  ravings  of  a  dream, 
because  they  are  not  in  accordance  with  the  language,  the  style,  and 
the  form  with  which  he  has  been  acquainted  since  his  youth, — 
behold,  his  is  the  power  [to  accept  or  reject].  Let  him  not  charge  the 
author  with  guilt,  nor  suspect  him  [of  evil  intent],  thereby  repaying 
good  with  evil.  Our  aim,  especially  in  chapters  xiii.  and  xiv.,  was 
to  shed  honor  on  our  wise  men,  to  glorify  their  names  and  memory, 
and  to  make  peace  between  the  two  laws,1  to  lay  bare  the  root  and 
origin  of  those  words  against  which  other  nations  plead  and  at 
which  the  frivolous  of  our  congregation  mock." 2  Krochmal  hoped  to 
counteract  the  effect  of  folly  and  fanaticism  on  Jewish  learning,  to 
make  known  the  events  of  history  as  they  befell  Israel,  to  trace  the 
origin  of  the  law  (Halakah),  to  characterize  the  Midrashic  literature, 
to  discuss  the  beginnings  of  Jewish  philosophy,  to  present  the  ideas 
of  Jewish  philosophers,  and  to  comment  upou  them;  in  short,  to 
effect  a  synthesis  between  Jewish  theology  and  Jewish  philosophy, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  principles  of  Ibn  Ezra  and  of  Maimonides, 
modified  by  those  of  Hegel,  on  the  other.  In  his  historical  research 
the  work  of  Azariah  dei  Kossi s  served  as  model.4 

Krochmal  desired  his  work  to  be  called  "Moreh  Nebuke  ha- 
Zeman"  (Guide  of  the  Perplexed  of  the  Time).  It  was  intended  to 
be  a  hand-book  for  present  needs,  as  Maimonides'  "  Moreh  Nebukim " 
(Guide  of  the  Perplexed)  had  been  in  the  Middle  Ages.  The  work 
is  divided  into  seventeen  chapters,5  of  which  the  first  six  are 
introductory.  The  author  discountenances  superstition,  fanaticism, 
hypocrisy,  materialism,  skepticism,  degeneracy,  and  the  belief  that 
salvation  may  be  attained  through  deeds  of  piety.  Salvation  can  be 
obtained  only  in  the  Golden  Mean.     Having  defined  Aristotle's  defini- 

1  The  oral  and  the  written  laws. 

2  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman,  2d  ed.,  p.  154. 

3  Azariah  dei  Rossi  (1614-1578),  author  of  the  Me'or  ''Enayiin,  was  the  pre- 
cursor of  the  modern  Jewish  critical  school.  Zunz's  life  of  Dei  Rossi,  in  Kerem 
Jlemed,  iv.  148. 

4Zunz,  Gesammelte  Schriften,  ii.  156. 

5  Compare  Zunz's  introduction  to  the  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman,  and  S.  Schbch- 
ter's  paper  on  Rabbi  Nachman  Krochmal,  read  before  the  Jews'  College  Literary 
Society,  London,  1887,  and  reprinted  in  his  Studies  in  Judaism,  Philadelphia, 
1896. 


10 

tion  of  "  the  good "  or  Golden  Mean,  and  having  discussed  at  some 
length  those  arguments  that  are  advanced  by  the  various  philosophical 
systems  with  the  view  of  tracing  all  phenomena  to  a  primary  cause, 
and  of  proving  the  existence  of  a  God,  Krochmal  passes  to  chapter 
vii.,  in  which  the  subject  proper  is  introduced.  The  ancient  history 
of  Israel,  whose  religion  was  monotheistic,  is  compared  with  the  his- 
tory of  other  ancient  but  idolatrous  peoples.  Like  all  other  nations, 
Israel  has  developed  in  accordance  with  the  natural  laws  of  growth, 
maturity,  and  decay,  and  has  even  passed  through  several  cycles  of 
such  a  development. 

The  first  cycle,  according  to  Krochmal,  runs  thus :  Growth,  from 
the  beginning  of  Israel's  existence  to  the  entrance  into  Palestine; 
maturity,  from  the  entrance  into  Palestine  to  the  death  of  Solomon; 

decay,  from  the  death  of  Solomon  to  the  murder  of  Gedoliah  (ch. 

...  . 
vni.). 

The  second  cycle  runs :  Growth,  from  the  beginning  of  the  Baby- 
lonian exile  till  the  time  of  Alexander  of  Macedon  (ch.  ix.) ;  matu- 
rity, from  Alexander  the  Great  to  the  quarrel  between  the  two  sons 
of  Alexander  Jannaeus,  which  period  is  noteworthy  for  having  pro- 
duced the  Great  Synagogue,  the  three  great  sects,  and  the  Apocrypha ; 
decay,  from  that  time  till  the  fall  of  Bether  and  the  completed  Eoman 
sovereignty  (ch.  x.). 

In  the  third  cycle,  this  triple  system  is  not  developed,  probably  be- 
cause of  the  failure  of  the  author's  health.  Chapter  xi.  is  divided 
into  fourteen  sections,  treating  of  a  variety  of  subjects,  such  as  the 
religious  life  of  Israel  without  national  life ;  the  composition  and  the 
antiquity  of  the  old  Testament ;  the  Second  Isaiah ;  Ezra ;  Chronicles ; 
Zachariah ;  Esther ;  Daniel ;  Ezekiel ;  Ecclesiastes ;  many  of  the  Psalms 
and  Apocrypha;  the  completion  of  the  Canon;  the  sects  of  the  time; 
the  Great  Synagogue;  and  the  relative  importance  of  tradition. 
Chapter  xiii.  deals  with  the  rise  of  Jewish  philosophy  in  the  Greek 
cities,  Philo,  Gnosticism,  and  the  Greek  versions  of  the  Bible.  Chap- 
ter xiv.  contains  a  brief  history  of  the  Halakah,  the  Haggadah,  and 
the  Midrashim.  In  ch.  xv.  is  an  attack  on  Cabala  and  Gnosticism, 
and  a  definition  of  Metatron,  Messiah,  and  soul.  In  chapters  xvi. 
and  xvii.  the  influence  of  Hegel  and  Ibn  Ezra  is  clearly  seen.  In 
chapter  xvi.  Krochmal  gives  a  sort  of  introduction  to  a  philosophy  of 
Jewish  history,  based  upon  the  principles  of  Hegel.     Chapter  xvii.  is 


11 

a  synopsis  of  Ibn  Ezra's  philosophy,  and  an  explanation  of  his  idea 
of  God. 

It  was  not  an  easy  matter  to  present  a  systematic  and  compre- 
hensive view  of  the  philosophy  of  Jewish  history.  Because  so  little 
had  been  done  in  this  line  of  work,  it  was  necessary  for  Krochmal  to 
go  far  afield  to  discuss  all  kinds  of  problems.  He  was  the  first  to 
offer  a  systematic  philosophy  of  Jewish  history,  regularly  divided  into 
parts,  and  to  treat  critically,  yet  with  reverence,  moot  points  of  the 
Scriptures,  the  Apocrypha,  and  Talmudic  and  Midrashic  literature.  Of 
this  volume,  I.  H.  Weiss,  one  of  the  greatest  living  Jewish  scholars, 
critics,  and  historians,1  says:  "Know  that,  despite  the  exaltedness  of 
his  imagination, — for  he  had  taken  wings  and  had  risen  to  the  heights 
of  philosophy, — it  is  to  be  lamented  that  he  forgot  the  world  of 
reality.  Besides  ...  he  filled  a  great  portion  of  his  book  with 
investigations  concerning  the  ideas  of  Kabbi  Abraham  ibn  Ezra,  a  phi- 
losophy secret  and  hidden,  by  means  of  which  he  interpreted  secret  by 
secret,  riddle  by  riddle ;  so  that  in  the  end  both  the  secret  and  the 
interpretation  thereof  remain  almost  unsolvable  conundrums.  I  am 
not  ashamed  to  acknowledge  that  some  of  his  interpretations  are 
beyond  my  grasp." 

Krochmal  was  the  philosopher  among  these  early  students.  His 
influence  on  the  historico-critical  school  is  not  to  be  gaged  so  much 
by  this  volume  as  by  the  stimulus  he  gave  to  the  researches  of  others. 
The  work  itself  was  not  published  till  after  the  middle  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  by  which  time  other  scholars  had  treated  upon  the 
historical  data  that  form  the  nucleus  of  the  "Moreh  Nebuke  ha- 
Zeman."     The  greatest  of  his  disciples  was  Solomon  Judah  Eapoport. 

It  would  be  erroneous  to  infer  that  the  work  discouraged  the  con- 
tinuance by  his  successors  of  the  labors  of  the  author;  for  the  por- 
tions on  Halakah  were  later  developed  by  Isaac  H.  Weiss,  in  his  "  Dor 
Dor  we-Dorshaw,"  and  by  others. 

Krochmal  was  the  first  of  the  modern  school  of  critics  to  break 
away  from  the  medievalism  in  which  Galicia  was  steeped.  Because 
of  his  powers  as  an  educator  and  reformer,  Zunz  has  well  styled 
him  the  "Mendelssohn  of  Galicia." a 

1  Zikronotai,  p.  119.  9  OesammeUe  Schriften,  ii.  153. 


12 


CHAPTER   III 

SOLOMON  JUDAH  (LOEB)  RAPOPORT 

Solomon  Judah  (Loeb)  Eapoport  was  born  in  Lemberg,  Galicia, 
June  1,  1790.  Both  on  his  father's  and  on  his  mother's  side  he 
descended  from  a  worthy  line1  of  Talmudists,  from  whom  he  inherited 
his  intellectual  qualities  and  his  love  for  Hebrew.  Like  Krochmal, 
Rapoport  grew  up  in  the  Jewish  culture  which  had  been  inherited 
from  medieval  times,  and  was  surrounded  by  influences  antagonistic 
to  modern  scholarly  research.  In  attempting  to  free  himself  from 
the  old  regime,  he,  too,  became  the  target  at  which  the  arrows  of 
those  opposed  to  progress  were  directed.  Despite  all  this,  despite 
even  the  objections  of  those  about  him,  he  would  not  be  satisfied 
with  what  seemed  to  him  to  be  inaccurate  or  uncertain.  In  the 
service  of  true  knowledge  he  resolved  to  dedicate  his  life  to  solving 
some  of  the  difficulties  that  beset  him  at  every  step  in  Jewish  history. 

Rapoport  was  a  thorough  Talmudist  and  Biblical  exegete,  ac- 
quainted with  French,  Italian,  Latin,  Greek,  Persian,  and  Arabic,  in 
all  of  which  he  was  self-educated.  But  what  is  more  astonishing  is 
the  fact  that  he  also  possessed  strong  religious  convictions.  These 
convictions  the  acquisition  of  secular  knowledge,  and  the  influ- 
ence which  various  literatures  must  have  had  upon  him,  railed  to 
shake.  He  was  alwavs  true  to  his  inner  self,  and  never  wavered  in 
his  belief;  for  this  belief  was  embedded  too  deeply  in  his  nature  to 
be  uprooted  by  any  temporary  doubt.  In  religious  matters,  while 
Rapoport' s  views  were  not  in  sympathy  with  those  of  the  older  ortho- 
dox party,  in  his  reform  he  was  conservative,  and  opposed  all  radical 
measures.2    He  insisted  upon  the  necessity  of  observing  not  only  the 

1  The  family  Rapoport  was  an  old  and  honorable  one,  of  which  there  are  records 
dating  from  the  fifteenth  century.  For  a  history  of  the  family,  the  origin  of  its 
name,  and  its  connection  with  Raven  and  Puerto,  cf.  Brann,  Die  Familie  Rapoport 
— das  Geschlecht  der  jungen  Raben,  in  Das  Centenarium  S.  J.  L.  RapoporVs  in 
Festgabe  der  Oeslerreichischen  Wochenschrift,  June  1,  1890 ;  Eliakim  Carmolt, 
Ha-Orevim  u-Bene  Yonah,  Rbdelheim,  1861,  and  Jacob  Reifmann  in  Smolen- 
ski's  Ea-Shahar,  iii.  353-376.  Compare,  also,  S.  Wiener,  Da'atKedoshim,  pp. 
135  el  seg.,  St.  Petersburg,  1897. 

2  Hence  Rapoport's  Or  ha-Torah,  a  criticism  of  Geiger's  Urschrift,  pub- 
lished, after  his  death,  in  Nahalat  Judah,  by  his  son,  Cracow,  1868. 


13 

written  law,  but  also  the  traditional  law.  Yet  the  man — upright  in 
all  his  ways,  pious  and  sincere  in  all  his  views — was  declared  by  his 
enemies  to  be  a  heretic,  a  destroyer  of  morals,  unfit  for  the  company 
and  the  instruction  of  the  young.  Plots  of  all  description  were  so 
frequently  and  at  times  so  ingeniously  concocted  against  him  that  his 
life  was  one  continuous  torture.  His  enemies  were  able  to  malign 
him  and  to  make  his  life  more  unbearable  than  Krochmal's  had  been, 
because  Rapoport  sought  rabbinical  honors.  Continual  were  the  at- 
tempts to  sully  his  reputation,  to  blast  his  hopes  and  aspirations,  even 
to  take  away  his  means  of  support.  But  as  in  Krochmal's  case  each 
successive  .illness  made  him  more  steadfast  in  purpose,  more  deter- 
mined to  push  on  investigation,  so  with  Eapoport  each  attack  made 
him  more  than  ever  resolved  to  conquer.  He  set  himself  tasks  the 
mere  conception  of  which  would  frighten  men  less  bold.  Having  to 
defend  his  opinions,  attacked  on  all  sides,  sometimes  justly,  more 
often  unjustly,  and  not  being  free  from  cares,  he  could  not  devote 
his  attention  to  the  completion  of  the  work  he  had  mapped  out  for 
himself;  the  mere  plan  of  which  suffices  to  show  that  labor  had  no 
terrors  for  him. 

Notwithstanding  his  unfulfilled  promises,  that  which  Eapoport 
accomplished  entitles  him  to  a  place  among  the  foremost  of  the  great 
Jewish  scholars  of  the  nineteenth  century.  In  all  his  works,  he 
united  a  thorough  knowledge  of  specifically  Jewish  with  secular  wis- 
dom :  he  pleaded  that  the  young  should  not  only  be  instructed  in  the 
Bible  and  the  Talmud,  but  that  they  should  receive  a  better  general 
education.  "  Dost  thou  think  that  Judaism  can  stand  by  itself  with- 
out taking  from  other  people  ?  .  .  .  God  scattered  us  over  the  world 
to  learn  here  a  little,  there  a  little,  ...  to  be  both  pupil  and  teacher." ' 

Rapoport' s  work  will  appeal  more  to  us  and  will  appear  in  a  bet- 
ter light  if  the  conditions  and  the  drawbacks  that  hampered  it  are 
thoroughly  realized.  His  whole  self  was  centered  in  a  professional 
life ;  he  had  little  or  no  inclination  for  trade  or  for  a  business  occupa- 
tion. A  bright  future  had  early  been  prophesied  for  him.  His  father, 
who  during  the  early  years  of  his  son's  life  had  ample  means  to  give 
him  a  good  training  and  to  indulge  him  in  all  his  desires,  became 
impoverished ;  and  from  that  time  Rapoport  was  compelled  to  shift 
for  himself.  He  began  a  small  business  of  his  own ;  but  it  was  not  suc- 
1Letter  to  Luzzatto,  dated  28  Nisan,  6601  (1841) :  Letters  of  Rapoport,  p.  108. 


14 

cessful.  In  1815  he  accepted  a  position  as  bookkeeper  and  cashier 
with  a  firm  that  had  rented  from  the  Government  the  farming  and 
collection  of  the  tax  levied  upon  each  Jew  for  the  right  to  eat  ritually 
killed  meat.1  During  these  years  (till  1832)  Rapoport  continued  his 
studies.  His  articles  began  to  attract  the  attention  of  the  learned  as 
well  as  the  antagonism  of  the  ignorant.  The  time  left  him  after 
the  completion  of  his  clerical  duties  was  not  sufficient  to  finish  his 
work.  He  saw  he  could  not  serve  two  masters  at  the  same  time.  If 
he  should  pay  attention  to  the  dictates  of  his  heart  and  give  all  his 
time  to  the  support  of  his  family,  his  intellect  must  starve ;  if  he 
should  yield  to  the  demand  of  his  intellect  his  family  must  starve. 
Either  was  an  evil  in  essentia?  "The  support  of  my  house  occupies 
the  time  of  day.  Only  a  few  hours  of  the  night  are  left  me  to  provide 
for  my  soul ;  and  these  are  not  sufficient  to  investigate  and  to  put  the 
result  into  proper  form.  During  the  last  few  years  I  began  to  seek  a 
place  as  rabbi,  thinking  that  in  such  a  position  I  might  rest,  .  .  .  that 
I  might  dwell  in  the  house  of  God  all  the  days  of  my  life,  that  I  might 
produce  pleasant  thoughts,  and  bring  to  light  my  great  works. " 3 
Here  was  a  poor  bookkeeper,  consumed  by  the  love  of  knowledge  and 
by  hatred  of  his  occupation,  seeking  a  position  as  rabbi,  in  order  to 
have  more  certain  means  of  sustenance,  and  more  leisure  to  concen- 
trate his  thoughts  on  his  work. 

In  1832,  probably  at  the  instigation  of  his  enemies,  Eapoport  was 
discharged  from  his  position.  In  attempting  to  secure  a  call  as  rabbi, 
he  gave  his  accusers  a  wider  field  for  attack. 

We  can  not  follow  him  in  his  frequent  applications  for  positions, 
nor  in  his  numerous  letters  imploring  those  with  whom  he  corre- 
sponded to  exert  their  influence  in  his  behalf.  There  was  always 
some  objection :  now  it  was  doubt  as  to  his  ability  to  deliver  sermons 
in  the  vernacular ;  now  his  advanced  ideas  were  to  his  discredit ;  and 
again,  not  having  a  university  education  or  degree  he  was  disqualified, 
according  to  the  laws  of  certain  countries,  for  appointment  to  the 
positions  for  which  he  applied.  Back  of  all  were  the  hands  of  his 
enemies. 

1  Bernfeld,  Toledot  Shir,  p.  15. 

9 Letter  to  Luzzatto,  in  Kerem  Hemed,  i.  23. 

3 Letters  to  Solomon  Rosenthal,  dated  23d  of  Adar  5592  (1832)  ;  Skai  le-Morek 
p.  24,  edited  by  Alexander  Buchler,  Budapest  (possibly  1895).  The  "great 
works  "  here  alluded  to  are  Toledot  Anshe  Sfiem  and  'Erek  Millin. 


15 

Rapoport' s  first  call  to  a  rabbinate  came  when  he  was  forty-seven 
years  old.  In  1837  he  was  elected  rabbi  in  Tarnopol,  Galicia.  But 
even  there  his  time  was  fully  occupied  in  defending  himself  from 
his  accusers.  A  vacancy  occurred  in  the  rabbinate  of  Prague,  and 
Rapoport  after  much  difficulty  was  proposed  as  a  candidate.  In 
1840,  through  the  instrumentality  of  Michael  Sachs,  then  preacher  in 
Prague,  and  the  Maskilim  (educated  members)  of  the  congregation, 
he  was  called  there  as  rabbi  of  the  Alt-neue  Synagoge.1 

His  first  sermon  in  Prague  satisfied  all  his  hearers,  and  quieted  all 
doubts  as  to  his  ability  to  fill  the  position.  Unfortunately,  the  ardor 
that  at  first  attended  his  presence  in  the  city  gradually  lessened,  and 
he  was  regarded  with  less  veneration.  The  Maskilim  who  brought 
about  his  election  had  expected  him  to  be  more  liberal;  the  hyper- 
orthodox  thought  him  insincere.  "That  which  thou  hast  asked 
about  our  friend,  the  wise  Rapoport,  and  concerning  his  achieve- 
ments in  Prague,  I  will  tell  you  in  a  few  words.  Both  factions  are 
now  against  him.  The  Maskilim  believed  that  Rapoport  would  bring 
about  changes  in  religious  observances  according  to  the  times.  Now 
they  see  that  their  counsel  was  not  taken.  The  learned  and  God- 
fearing [i.e.,  hyper-orthodox],  on  the  other  hand,  are  against  him  be- 
cause although  Rapoport,  like  them,  retains  all  the  customs  of  Israel, 
they  do,  nevertheless,  suspect  him  of  hypocrisy."3 

Eagerly  as  Rapoport  sought  quiet  and  rest  "  to  dwell  in  the  house 
of  God,  to  study  the  Torah  and  investigate  the  ancient  history  of 
Israel,  to  work  over  the  words  of  the  ancient  rabbis,  to  dispel  the 
clouds  that  darken  justice," 3  the  longed-for  peace  never  came.  From 
the  time  of  his  acceptance  of  the  rabbinate  in  Prague  until  his  death, 
October  16,  1867,  his  life  was  a  continual  strife.  He  himself  ac- 
knowledged that  he  had  greater  freedom  of  action  during  the  years 
of  his  clerkship.  During  those  years  of  comparative  independence, 
the  best  of  his  works  were  planned  and  written.  While  in  Tarnopol, 
he  produced  nothing  of  value,  and  in  Prague  little  more.     Active 

1  He  had  no  specified  salary,  but  the  wealthy  of  the  congregation  gave  him 
annually  a  purse  of  five  hundred  florins  in  addition  to  certain  perquisites.  This 
sum  was  later  raised  to  six  hundred  (Bernfeld,  Toledot  Shir,  p.  106). 

9  Letters  from  Moses  Landau  to  Samuel  Rosenthal,  1841,  cited  by  Bernfeld, 
Toledot  Shir,  p.  105. 

3  First  letter  to  Luzzatto  after  Kapoport's  arrival  in  Prague  (Letters  of  Rapo- 
port, p.  216). 


16 

almost  till  his  death,  he  published  some  articles  after  his  arrival  in 
Prague,1  but  these  are  not  marked  by  the  originality  and  spontaneity 
of  thought  of  his  earlier  years.2 

Eapoport' s  works  may  be  divided  as  follows: 

I.  Early  Prose  Writings. 

II.  Verse: 

(a)  Hebrew. 

(b)  Translations  into  Hebrew. 

(1)  Poems. 

(2)  Drama. 

III.  Correspondence  and  Polemics. 
.IV.  Critical  Works : 

(a)  Biblical. 

(b)  Historical — bibliographies  of  scholars  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
("  Anshe  Shem  " — which,  though  promised,  never  appeared.) 

(c)  Talmudic. 

Early  in  life  Eapoport  exhibited  a  taste  for  literature.  His  youth 
had  been  devoted  mainly  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud,  the  keen  dis- 
cussions of  which  sharpened  his  intellect  and  made  possible  acute 
thought  and  nice  distinctions.  Fortunately,  he  soon  discarded  the 
use  of  pilpul,3  though,  when  hard  pressed  to  defend  his  theories,  he 
would  use  the  same.  Innate  keenness  was  allied  to  graceful  style, 
which  was  rendered  the  more  forcible  and  convincing  by  a  thorough 
mastery  of  the  subject  in  hand.  His  first  Hebrew  prose  work  was  a 
"Description  of  the  City  of  Paris  and  the  Island  of  Elba."4  The 
first  work  to  draw  attention  to  the  author,  however,  was  an  article 
in  the  "Bikkure  ha-'Ittim,"  6  on  "The  Free  Jews  of  Arabia."  Be- 
cause of  its  value,  the  article  was  translated  into  German  by  Furst.6 
The  kind  reception  of  this  early  work  was  more  than  the  author 
had  counted  upon,  and  served  as  an  incentive  to  more  earnest 
effort. 

In  poetry  Eapoport  was  not  so  successful  as  in  prose ;  for  the 

'The  '■Erek  Millin  was  published  after  his  arrival  in  Prague,  but  was 
planned,  begun,  and  doubtless  partly  written  before.  The  best  of  his  works  writ- 
ten entirely  in  Prague  was  an  article  published  in  the  Eerem  Hemed,  v.  197-232, 
an  attack  on  the  perjuries  and  falsifications  of  the  Karaites. 

2M.  Steinschneider,  Gegenwart,  1867,  p.  338. 

3 The  technical  term  for  Rabbinical  casuistry.     4  Anonymous,  Lemberg,  1814. 

5 1823,  iv.  51-77.         *  Orient,  i.,  No.  25;  ii.  397. 


17 

thought  he  wishes  to  convey  is  frequently  vague,  and  his  expression 
is  heavier  than  in  prose,  because  he  pays  greater  attention  to  form 
than  to  the  thought  expressed.1  He  lacked  both  the  poetic  tempera- 
ment and  poetic  inspiration.  Possibly  because  he  felt  this  defect,  he 
applied  himself  to  the  translation  of  verse  rather  than  to  the  composi- 
tion of  original  themes.3  In  poetry  he  was  pre-eminently  an  imitator. 
His  first  attempt  was  "  Hazlahat  ha-Bayit "  (the  Prosperity  of  the 
House),3  a  partial  translation  and  revision  of  Schiller's  "Glocke." 
The  same  theme  served  later  as  material  for  another  translation, 
"Ha-Be'erah"  (the  Fire-Bell).4  He  wrote  and  translated  many  other 
poems ;  but  they  added  very  little  to  his  reputation.  His  dramas  are 
better  known  than  his  poems.  When  thirty-five  years  old,  he  pub- 
lished one  which  is  in  the  main  a  translation  of  Racine's  "Esther," 
entitled  "She'erit  Yehudah  "  (the  Remnant  of  Judah),6  in  the  intro- 
duction to  which  are  to  be  found  some  of  Rapoport's  first  attempts  at 
Biblical  criticism. 

The  writing  of  verse  was  for  Rapoport  only  a  passing  fancy.  Yet 
the  periods  spent  in  belles-lettres  during  his  early  years  were  not 
entirely  without  direct  benefit  to  him.  They  formed,  as  it  were,  his 
apprenticeship  in  literature,  and  served  him  later  in  good  stead ;  for 
during  these  years  of  apprenticeship  his  style  was  refined,  and  his 
taste  given  time  to  mature  and  develop.  His  style  became  pure  and 
simple,  his  vocabulary  being  preferably  that  of  the  Bible.  Few  of 
his  contemporaries  could  equal  him  in  prose  writing.6 

More  interesting  than  his  early  writings  are  his  letters  7  and  his 
contributions  to  polemical  literature.  He  maintained  an  extensive 
correspondence  with  all  the  leading  Jews  of  his  day.  Scholars 
gladly  kept  in  touch  with  him,  and  used  this  means  of  communica- 
tion to  place  before  him  for  solution  many  difficult  problems.     In 

1  Bernfeld,  Toledot  Shir,  p.  99.  9  Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  87. 

8 Bikkure  ha-1  Ittim,  1820,  i.  110.  4Ibid.,  182C,  vii.  11G. 

6 Ibid.,  1827,  viii.  172-254.  6 Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  87. 

1  His  letters  to  Luzzatto  have  been  edited :  (a)  Zikkaron  la-Aharonim  con- 
taining six  letters  (1829-1833)  to  S.  D.  Luzzatto,  by  A.  Harkavy  with  notes  by 
S.  J.  Halberstam,  Wilna,  1881 ;  (6)  Iggerot  Shir,  letters  to  S.  D.  Luzzatto,  1833- 
1800,  edited  and  annotated  by  S.  J.  Halberstam,  Przemysl,  1885.  Some  of  his 
letters  relative  to  his  career  in  Prague  will  be  found  in  Shai  le-Moreh,  ed.  Alex- 
ander BCchler,  1895.  Other  letters  appeared  in  the  various  periodicals  of  his 
time.  A  few  relative  to  his  appointment  in  Prague  have  been  translated  into 
German  in  the  Centenarium  Rapoport's,  already  referred  to. 


18 

this  way  many  writers,  even  the  masters,1  received  their  inspiration 
and  much  of  their  information.  The  direct  and  indirect  influence  of 
Eapoport's  correspondence,  irrespective  of  his  own  publications,  upon 
the  pamphlets  and  books  of  others  can,  perhaps,  never  fully  be  told. 
In  his  day  his  superiority  was  recognized.  He  was  an  encyclopedia 
of  Jewish  learning;  and  on  questions  of  difficulty,  he  was  the  final 
authority.2 

His  polemical  writings  present  a  different  side  of  the  man's  char- 
acter. Unlike  Krochmal,  he  was  proud  and  at  times  overbearing  and 
headstrong.3  His  polemics  were  directed  against  two  different  classes : 
(1)  the  Hasidim,  and  (2)  that  type  of  men  of  which  the  editors  of 
the  "Ha-Eo'eh  '  (the  Spectator)  were  the  representatives,  who  used 
their  journal  to  abuse  Rapoport,  Zunz,  Luzzatto,  and  Beggio  rather 
than  criticize  their  views,  who  frequently  incited  the  mob  against 
Eapoport,  and  tried  to  wrest  from  him  all  chance  of  election  to  the 
rabbinical  office  in  Prague.  Justifiable  as  his  wrath  was,  his  retort 
but  aggravated  the  situation.  In  this  part  of  his  polemical  writings 
we  can  sympathize  with  him ;  but  his  others  were  not  so  justifiable, 
as  they  were  directed  against  those  within  his  own  circle  who  meant 
no  harm  to  his  person  nor  desired  to  diminish  his  fame,  but  who, 
like  him,  strove  for  truth,  and  hence  tested  the  veracity  of  his  state- 
ments. 

Eapoport  resented  criticism,  and  disliked  any  one  who  questioned 
his  assertions.4  He  used  all  means  to.  controvert  their  opinions,  and 
did  not  have  the  heart  to  acknowledge  the  truth  5  of  their  argument. 
But  dear  to  him  as  were  his  own  writings,  equally  so  were  those  of 
Maimonides  and  Ibn  Ezra.  He  who  ventured  to  controvert  aught 
written  by  them  had  to  reckon  with  Eapoport. 

This  spirit,  naturally,  plunged  him  into  lengthy  controversies, 
and  deprived  him  of  much  time  that  might  have  been  spent  on  the 
works  he  had  hoped  to  finish."  By  one  of  these  controversies  the 
friendship  between  the  two  scholars,  Luzzatto  and  Eapoport,  was 

1  Compare  Zunz's  acknowledgment  of  his  debt  to  Rapoport  through  his  cor- 
respondence, Gottesdienstliche  Vortrage,  2d  ed.,  p.  xiii. 

2  Such  as  the  questions  of  the  49  Middot  of  Rabbi  Nathan  of  Babylon.  Com- 
pare Behinat  ha-Dat  (Examen  religionis)  of  Rabbi  Elijah  del  Medigo,  edited  by 
I.  S.  Reggio,  1833,  p.  91,  note  6. 

3 Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  91.  4 Weiss,  Ibid.,  p.  90. 

6 Ibid.,  p.  93.  «Ibid.t  p.  90. 


19 

broken.1  When  Rapoport  saw  that  not  one  scholar  only,  but  all 
scholars  were  in  arms  against  his  overbearing  disposition,  he  was 
compelled  to  modify  his  tone.  "  It  is  not  my  purpose  to  reprove,  but 
to  instruct  ...  If,  as  you  say,  you  have  found  errors  in  my  works, 
or  if  you  think  you  will  find  more,  behold !  I  am  man  and  not  God. 
What  man  is  there  who  shall  say,  'I  have  purged  my  works  of  all 
error  and  cleansed  them  of  doubt '  ?  What  can  you  say  against  my 
works  in  general  ?  Are  not  the  paths  I  lay  bare  good  ?  Did  I  not 
work  with  all  my  heart  to  come  nigh  to  truth?  Did  you  not  find  in 
many  places  wisdom  and  good  taste?  Have  I  not  shown  the  way 
to  others?  Long  since  have  all  those  who  examined  with  upright 
heart  acknowledged  that  I  am  he  who  made  known  in  Israel  the  way 
of  learning.  I  dug  the  ancient  history  of  Israel  from  beneath  mounds 
of  dust  in  order  to  shed  light  upon  it.  From  that  time  the  spirit  of 
investigation  spread  in  Italy  and  Germany  ...  By  my  soul,  only 
for  your  sake  and  for  the  welfare  of  Jeshurun — not  mine  own — I 
turned  to  speak  to  you  in  the  fulness  of  my  heart." a 

The  importance,  however,  of  Rapoport  is  to  be  found  in  the  work 
he  has  done  as  a  critic.3  In  his  historico-critical  studies  the  full 
extent  of  his  erudition  and  wisdom  is  seen.  In  these  he  was  most 
successful;  and  it  is  solely  because  of  them  that  his  name  will  go 
down  to  posterity. 

After  the  close  of  the  Talmud  and  throughout  the  Middle  Ages 
much  obscurity  seemed  to  surround  many  of  the  Jewish  celebrities. 
Rapoport  set  himself  the  task  of  clearing  this  away ;  so  that  in  pre- 
senting the  results  of  his  study  he  revivified  names  which,  though 
current  among  the  Jews,  were  mere  shades  of  a  dead  past. 

1  Luzzatto  had  disparagingly  criticized  Maimonides  and  Ibn  Ezra,  for  which 
Rapoport  challenged  him. 

*Kerem  TTemed,  vi.  94.  Other  semi-polemical,  semi-critical  works  were:  (a) 
Or  ha-Torah,  Cracow,  1868,  a  criticism  of  Geiger's  Urschrift  for  having  handled 
the  material  of  the  Bible  too  freely  ;  (b)  Bibre  Shalom  we-Emet,  Prague,  1801,  which 
was  directed  against  S.  M.  Hirsch,  and  in  defense  of  Z.  Franker s  Darke  ha-Mish- 
nah;  (c)  a  dispute  with  Jost,  in  Kerem  Ilemed,  iv.  104  et  seq.,  vii.  138  et  seq.  in 
regard  to  Judah  the  Prince. 

3Rapoport's  essay  on  Biblical  criticism  in  the  notes  of  the  She'erit  Yehudah 
has  already  been  mentioned.  As  a  Biblical  critic  he  was  modest;  yet,  consider- 
ing his  surroundings,  he  must  be  judged  liberal.  Though  he  thought  he  was  ever 
in  keeping  with  the  Masoretic  text — and  he  no  doubt  always  meant  to  restrict 
himself  to  its  dicta — he  confessed  he  found  traces  of  Maccabean  influence  in 
the  Psalms,  and  traces  of  Persian  influence  in  the  Second  Isaiah. 


20 

The  manner  in  which  Rapoport  was  first  directed  to  this  particular 
field  of  study  is  interesting.  Some  time  after  he  had  begun  to  read 
French,  a  copy  of  Bayle's  "  Dictionnaire  historique  et  critique  " — a  sort 
of  encyclopedia  of  the  bibliographies  of  historic  personages — fell  into 
his  hands.1  After  having  studied  its  contents  it  occurred  to  him  to 
produce  something  similar  in  Hebrew,  which  should  contain  the  biog- 
raphies of  eminent  Jewish  historic  persons  and  should  be  entitled 
"  Toledot  Anshe  Shem "  (Biographies  of  Eminent  Men).  From  re- 
peated references  in  his  earlier  writings,  especially  in  his  correspond- 
ence, he  led  scholars  to  believe  that  his  "  'Erek  Millin "  and  his 
"  Toledot  Anshe  Shem  *  had  already  been  completed,  or  were  very  near 
completion.2  After  his  death,  no  trace  of  such  a  work  as  the  "Anshe 
Shem  "  was  to  be  found.  That  the  author  did  intend  to  publish  such 
a  work  is  certain.  He  regards  his  biographies  as  a  "few  sketches 
culled  from  the  contents  of  my  greater  work."  3  According  to  Weiss, 
the  historical  notes  appended  to  the  '  Erek  Millin  "  might  serve  as  a 
nucleus  for  such  a  work.4  If  his  biographical  studies  are  representa- 
tive of  his  greater  work,  it  is  a  pity  that  the  task  was  never  com- 
pleted: for  the  study  of  Jewish  literature  and  Jewish  history  its 
worth  would  have  been  inestimable. 

Of  his  biographies  the  first  to  appear  was  that  of  Saadia  (1828). 6 
This  was  followed  in  1829  by  the  biographies  of  Nathan  of  Rome,6 

jKurlander,  S.  L.  Rapoport,  p.  20;  Das  Centenarium  RapoporVs,  p.  390. 

2Zunz,  in  his  Gottesdienstliche  Vortrdge,  2d  ed.,  p.  zii.,  mentions  the  forth- 
coming volume:  "Ansche  Schem,  worin  das  Leben  und  Werken  der  hervor- 
ragendsten  jiidischen  Gesetzlehrer,  Rabbiner  und  Schriftsteller,  namentlich  aus 
dem  talmudischen  und  der  gaonaischen  Zeit  beschrieben  werden." 

3  Shai  le-Moreh,  p.  24.  4  Zikronotai,  p.  90. 

5  Saadia  ben  Joseph  al-Fayyumi  (892-942),  Gaon  of  Sura,  philosopher,  gram- 
marian, lexicographer,  and  translator. 

6  Nathan  ben  Jehiel  of  Rome  [circa  1000],  compiler  of  the  ''Aruk  or  Talmudic 
lexicon.  This  biography  later  caused  him  much  inconvenience  and  almost  lost 
for  him  his  appointment  as  rabbi  in  Prague.  Between  1819  and  1822,  Moses 
Landau,  the  president  of  the  congregation  to  which  Rapoport  was  later  called, 
had  published  in  five  parts  an  'Aruk  which  he  called  Ma'arke  Lashon.  In 
his  biography  of  Nathan  of  Rome,  Rapoport  gave  Landau  due  praise  for  his 
attempt,  but  at  the  same  time  showed  the  true  nature  of  Landau's  work, 
which  at  best  was  Rabbi  Nathan's  'Aruk  changed  somewhat  in  form.  This 
is  but  one  instance  of  Rapoport's  fearlessness.  Future  benefit,  or  the  influ- 
ence that  any  one  exerted,  never  deterred  him  from  proclaiming  the  truth.  In 
this  biography  Rapoport  announced  the  appearance  of  the  ''Erek  Millin,  as  a 
continuation  of  the  '  Aruk. 


21 

Hai  Gaon,1  and  Eleazar  Kalir;2  while  those  of  Rabbi  Hananeel3  and 
Rabbi  Nissim  ben  Jacob9  appeared  in  1831.  These  biographies 
were  the  best  work  that  Rapoport  produced,  and  were  completed  six 
or  seven  years  before  his  appointment  to  Tarnopol. 

Rapoport  was  too  poor  to  publish  them  in  book-form,  and  was 
compelled  to  resort  to  the  periodicals,  in  which  they  appeared  as 
monographs.  In  this  case  poverty  was  a  benefit  to  Rapoport' s  fame; 
for  the  periodicals  spread  much  farther  and  reached  readers  who 
would  not  have  had  the  means  to  invest  in  books.  The  biographical 
studies  made  him  famous ;  and  the  world  began  to  recognize  him  as 
an  authority.  Rapoport  was  now  forty  years  old.  Though  there  were 
many  errors  of  detail  in  his  work,  yet,  as  a  whole,  it  was  thorough, 
and  gave  a  certain  direction  to  the  study  of  Jewish  history.  "  The 
six  biographies  in  the  '  Bikkure  ha-'  Ittim '  were  diamond-mines  for 
the  historian  of  Jewish  literature."4 

Besides  giving  a  lucid  account  of  the  biography  of  each  of  his 
heroes  and  an  instructive  resume'  of  their  work,  he  embodied  in  his 
studies  an  accurate  portrayal  of  the  culture  of  the  time  in  which  they 
lived.  He  outlined  the  relation  and  intercourse  of  the  Jewish  com- 
munities in  the  different  parts  of  Europe,  North  Africa,  and  Asia 
during  those  ages  of  which  so  little  was  known.  In  some  cases  he 
settled  dates  which  hitherto  had  been  quite  uncertain;  in  others,  he 
corrected  gross  errors  that  had  been  made  by  previous  scholars ;  and 
he  showed  that  an  exact  idea  of  the  development  of  Jewish  learning 
could  not  be  obtained  by  the  study  of  any  individual  community  or 
of  any  particular  group  of  scholars  dwelling  in  any  one  locality,  but 
that,  as  intercourse  between  Jews  the  world  over  was  so  constant, 
and  as  each  community  was  influenced  by  others,  a  knowledge  of  the 
state  of  the  Jews  in  one  place,  to  be  thorough,  must  include  a  knowl- 
edge of  their  condition  throughout  the  world. 

His  other  great  critical  work  was  the  "  'Erek  Millin,"  B  an  encyclo- 

1  Hai  ben  Sherira  [969-1039],  Gaon  of  Pumbedita,  and  an  eminent  Talmudist. 
He  was  the  representative  of  the  Judaism  of  his  day ;  and  all  difficult  questions 
were  referred  to  him. 

'About  Eleazar  Kalir  very  little  is  known.  He  is  supposed  to  have  lived 
at  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  century  and  was  a  great  payye^an  (religious  poet). 

8  Hananeel  and  Nissim  ben  Jacob,  both  of  Kairwan,  North  Africa,  were 
noted  Talmudists  in  the  first  half  of  the  eleventh  century. 

4F.  Delitzsch,  Zur  Geschichte  der  judischen  Poesie  (1836),  p.  119. 

6 'Erek  Millin,  opus  encyclopcedicum,  alphab.  ordine  dispositum  in  quo  et  res 


22 

pedia  of  Talmudic  terms  arranged  alphabetically.  The  work  repre- 
sents the  toil  of  an  entire  life.  It  was  begun  in  Eapoport's  youth; 
and  had  not  the  troubles  which  befell  him  during  the  period  of  his 
greatest  intellectual  activity  interrupted  his  studies,  we  should  have 
had  a  voluminous  encyclopedia — a  herculean  task  for  one  man.  His 
troubled  life  in  Tarnopol  and  Prague,  however,  gave  him  no  time  to 
finish  his  "great  works." 

When  Kapoport  resumed  his  work  on  the  encyclopedia,  he  had 
passed  his  sixtieth  year  without  having  published  a  single  volume. 
He  felt  that  his  remaining  years  were  few,  and,  therefore,  hastened 
the  work  as  much  as  possible,  with  the  result  that  the  first  part,  con- 
taining the  entire  letter  Aleph,  was  published.1  After  the  enthusi- 
astic welcome  his  biographies  had  received,  the  reception  of  the  first 
volume  of  the  long-promised  encyclopedia  must  have  grieved  the  old 
scholar ;  for  it  did  not  realize  the  anticipations  of  the  learned  world. 

Whatever  the  faults  of  the  work,  it  had  many  good  qualities.  By 
it  were  explained  many  passages  in  the  Talmud  and  the  Midrashim 
relative  to  historic  occurrences  which,  because  of  vagueness,  had  hith- 
erto been  misunderstood  and  misinterpreted,  and  had  been  a  source 
of  much  perplexity  to  scholars.  Owing  to  Eapoport's  investigations 
many  doubtful  passages  have  received  their  correct  historical  setting, 
many  ambiguous  terms  have  been  given  their  correct  signification, 
and  to  formerly  unknown  places  localities  have  been  supplied. 

Eapoport  presented  much  interesting  matter  relating  to  the  sects 
among  the  Jews  in  Talmudic  times ;  and  by  his  study  of  the  Hagga- 
dah  and  the  classification  of  the  same,  he  simplified  to  a  considerable 
extent  the  work  of  Zunz.  Though  the  "  'Erek  Millin  "  was  published 
long  after  "Die  Gottesdienstlichen  Vortrage,"  it  is  probable,  judging 
from  Zunz's  recognition  of  his  debt  to  Eapoport,  in  the  introduction 
to  the  latter  work,  that  he  made  use  of  the  wide  knowledge  of  the 
Galician  student. 

In  the  "  'Erek  Millin  "  there  are  evident  traces  of  Krochmal's  influ- 

et  voces  ad  historiam,  geographiam,  archceologiam,  dignitates,  sectas,  illustresque 
homines  spectantes  quae,  in  utroque  Talmude,  Tosefta,  Targumicis,  Midrashicisque 
libris  occurrunt  necdum  satis  explicate  sunt,  illustrantur.  I.  Continens  totam  Lit- 
teram  Aleph,  Prague,  1852. 

1  Rapoport  made  a  special  journey  to  Berlin  to  consult  with  his  friends,  Zunz 
and  Sachs,  in  regard  to  raising  the  necessary  funds  for  the  publication  of  the 
volume  (Beenfeld,  Toledot  Shir) ,  p.  124. 


23 

ence  upon  Rapoport.  In  his  eulogy  '  on  Krochmal,  Rapoport  acknowl- 
edged that  from  the  time  he  came  in  contact  with  his  teacher  and 
friend  he  was  a  different  man.  To  Krochmal  is  due  much  of  Rapo- 
port' s  knowledge,  and  especially  his  interest  in  historical  research.8 
Where  the  influence  of  Krochmal  upon  Rapoport  began  and  where 
it  ended  may  never  be  known.  Yet  it  is  evident  that  Rapoport' s 
Talmudic  studies  were  guided,  to  a  very  great  extent,  by  Krochmal' s 
spirit.3  Weiss  goes  further  and  says4  "that  all  the  things  worth 
hearing  in  the  chapter  on  Haggadah  are  taken  from  Krochmal,  differ- 
ing only  in  form  and  expression ;  and  that  the  additions  made  by 
Rapoport  are  of  small  value."  In  other  words,  Rapoport' s  Talmudic 
investigations  are  supplementary  to  those  already  made  by  his  master, 
and  augmented  Krochmal' s  results  but  little. 

In  his  biographical  and  purely  historical  studies  Rapoport  was 
undoubtedly  a  pioneer.  In  these  he  was  entirely  original.  Because 
of  his  wide  knowledge  of  the  Talmud  and  Midrash,  and  because  of 
his  critical  turn  of  mind,  he  was  the  first  to  extract  historical  data 
from  passages  out  of  which  none  had  hoped  to  obtain  information. 
In  this  lay  his  originality.  It  is  true  that  Zunz's  life  of  Rashi  ante- 
dated the  appearance  of  Rapoport' s  biographies.  What  if  Rapoport 
saw  this  and  used  it  as  the  pattern  for  his  biographies  ?  This  does 
not  detract  from  the  merit  of  the  Galician,  whose  articles,  by  the 
method  of  criticism  he  employed,  paved  the  way  in  which  all  who 
wished  to  treat  of  Jewish  history  must  follow,  and  which  articles 
were  used  by  the  great  German  student,  who  willingly  admits  his  in- 
debtedness. Zunz  himself  acknowledged  that  the  palm  belonged  to 
Rapoport.5  Wherefore  for  Rapoport  may  justly  be  claimed  the  honor 
of  having  been  the  father  of  modern  Hebrew  biography. 

lKerem  Hemed,  vi.  41. 

8  Sitzungsberichteder  Wiener  Akademie,  1853,  p.  312,  note. 

8Bernfeld,  Toledot  Shir,  p.  31.  4Dor  Dor  we-Dorsfiaw,  ii.  24,  note. 

'Bernfeld,  Ibid.,  p.  32,  note. 


24 
CHAPTEK   IV 

ISAAC  SAMUEL  EEGGIO 

The  first  of  the  Italian  school  to  attract  our  attention  is  Isaac 
Samuel  Reggio  (Yashar).  He  was  born  August  15,  1784,  in  Gorizia, 
and  died  August  29,  1855.  His  life,  as  he  himself  acknowledged,1 
was  uneventful  and  devoid  of  interest  to  others.  Son  and  successor  of 
Rabbi  Abraham  Vita  Reggio,  who  was  noted  for  his  attack  upon  the 
local  rabbis  and  his  defense  of  Wessely's  program  of  higher  educa- 
tion for  the  Jew,a  Isaac  was  reared  at  home  in  an  atmosphere  whose 
chief  characteristics  were  extreme  piety  and  liberality  of  view.  The 
Bible  and  the  Talmud  were  the  bases  of  his  rabbinical  studies;  the 
best  grammatical  and  exegetical  works  were  most  carefully  read. 
Secular  studies,  however,  were  not  ignored.  For  these  he  attended 
the  gymnasium  and  college  of  his  native  city.  Of  the  subjects  taken 
while  at  college,  mathematics  was  his  favorite  study.  When  eigh- 
teen years  old,  he  solved  a  prize  problem  offered  by  a  Hungarian 
Society  of  Science 3  which  made  him  famous  in  his  native  town,  and 
later  secured  for  him  a  professor's  chair  at  the  college  of  Gorizia.  At 
the  end  of  the  Napoleonic  influence  in  Illyria,  Reggio  was  compelled 
to  resign  this  chair ;  and  the  rest  of  his  life  he  devoted  to  the  study 
of  the  history,  literature,  and  religion  of  his  people.  To  further  that 
study,  he  used  every  possible  source  of  information.  A  Persian  gram- 
mar, to  which  was  appended  a  vocabulary  of  Persian  words,  is  said  * 
to  have  fallen  into  his  hands.  Reggio  set  himself  to  learn  this  gram- 
mar and  vocabulary  in  order  to  be  able  to  trace  the  Persian  influences 
which  he  was  convinced  were  to  be  found  in  the  Talmud. 

Like  most  of  the  Jews  of  the  Italy  of  his  day,  Reggio  was  in  his 
youth  greatly  interested  in  the  Cabala,  and  eagerly  read  and  studied 
all  the  cabalistic  works  that  came  within  his  reach.  But  in  the 
Cabala  he  could  find  no  solace ;  and  he,  therefore,  turned  to  what,  at 
that  time,  must  have  been  considered  the  other  extreme.  He  began 
to  study  thoroughly  the  works  of  Mendelssohn  and  Wessely.  A  new 
field  was  opened  to  him,  and  gave  him  renewed  inspiration.     In  Italy 

1  Maskeret  Yashar,  p.  4,  Vienna,  1849. 

2Philippson's  Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,  1837,  i.  228. 

3  Maskeret  Yashar,  p.  21.  4  Zikronotai,  p.  153. 


25 

Mendelssohn  and  Wessely  were  practically  unknown.  Reggio  re- 
solved to  be  their  disciple,  their  exponent.1 

The  first  article  published  by  Reggio  in  Hebrew  was  an  intro- 
ductory study  of  the  Pentateuch  (Vienna,  1821),  in  which  he  upheld 
the  inspiration  of  the  Law.  In  the  same  year  he  published  a  new 
translation  of  the  Pentateuch  in  Italian,  together  with  a  commentary, 
which  was  very  well  received.  A  series  of  translations  of  and  com- 
mentaries on  the  Scriptures  followed.  Among  these,  the  translation 
of  Isaiah  (1821)  deserves  special  mention,  in  that  it  was  a  paraphrase 
prompted  by  Gesenius'  translation  of  the  same  book.*  Such  work 
was  more  or  less  in  imitation  of  his  masters'.  Mendelssohn's  and 
Wessely' s  translations  were  his  patterns;  their  exegesis  was  the  basis 
for  his  commentaries.  In  these  commentaries  the  liberal  training  of 
his  youth  asserted  itself.  He  cared  for  and  sought  only  truth.  The 
Bible  was  sacred  only  in  so  far  as  it  proclaimed  the  truth.  He  em- 
ployed the  methods  of  modern  Biblical  criticism.  "  Thus  I  show  you, 
my  friend,  one  of  many  examples  of  the  use  of  modern  criticism  and 
its  preference  over  ancient  investigation."3  He  attacked  the  tradi- 
tional view  that  the  Psalms,  even  those  inscribed  "to  David,"  or 
"by  David,"  were  written  by  that  king.  According  to  Reggio,  their 
contents  renders  such  a  theory  untenable.  He  also  attempted  to  de- 
termine the  date  of  Joel.4  Joel,  he  affirmed,  lived  and  prophesied  in 
the  first  years  of  the  reign  of  King  Joash  of  Judah,  during  the  su- 
premacy of  the  priests.  Because  the  priests  were  then  all-powerful, 
the  king's  name  is  not  mentioned. 

Reggio' s  ideals  were  high.  He  wanted  to  be  more  than  a  trans- 
lator and  an  exegete.5  He  did  not  wish  to  be  simply  a  bibliographer; 
for  bibliographers,  he  wrote,6  "deal  only  with  trivial  and  secondary 
information.  Patience  and  perseverance,  not  erudition,  are  required 
to  accomplish  their  joyless  task."  Neither  did  he  care  to  do  such 
work  as  Zunz  had  accomplished,  "  to  spend  day  and  night  in  search 
of  piyyut,  seliha,  and  other  forms  of  poetry,  or  to  correct  what  was 
only  a  misprint."  "When  a  book  like  this  appears,  a  great  shout 
arises  in  the  camp  of  the  Hebrews.     With  a  voice  of  joy,  mirth,  and 

1  Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,  Beiblatt  No.  36,  p.  163. 
^Der  Prophet  Jesaja,  1821  (not  completed  till  1829). 
3Maskeret  Yashar,  p.  46.  4Ibid.,  p.  44. 

8  In  the  Yalkut  Yashar,  1854,  Reggio  published  a  collection  of  critical  notes 
on  the  Bible.  6Maskeret  Yashar,  pp.  6,  7. 


26 

exultation,  the  grand  and  wonderful  discovery  is  heralded  as  if  the 
prosperity  of  the  nation  depended  on  it." 1  All  such  knowledge  was 
secondary  in  Eeggio's  eyes.  His  task  was  to  be  the  exploration  of 
that  realm  from  which  the  greatest  possible  good  would  come  to 
Israel.  In  his  Biblical  studies  he  was  an  imitator.  But  he  did  not 
wish  to  be  merely  the  disciple  of  Mendelssohn  and  of  Wessely :  he 
desired  to  be  their  successor,  to  be  a  philosopher,  to  rank  among 
those  who  had  written  on  the  philosophy  of  religion.  He  aspired  to 
be  the  philosopher  of  modern  Judaism. 

He  persuaded  himself  that  his  mission  lay  in  reconciling  phi- 
losophy and  Judaism.  The  desire  to  do  this  arose  from  a  considera- 
tion of  conditions  within  the  ranks  of  the  Jews,  and  because  of  a 
certain  pressure  from  without.  In  Israel  two  factions  were  arrayed 
against  each  other,  each  party  holding  steadfastly  to  its  own  doc- 
trines. On  the  one  hand,  were  the  strict  followers  of  tradition  and 
the  Talmud,  who  did  not  consider  it  necessary  to  go  outside  of  that 
which  had  been  handed  down  by  the  Fathers ;  on  the  other,  were 
those  who  believed  that  truth  and  knowledge  were  to  be  found  only 
through  science  and  philosophy,  and  who  in  the  pursuit  of  these  studies 
eyed^Talmudism  with  a  certain  scorn. 

The  governmental  decree  forbidding  communities  to  instal  rabbis 
who  had  not  taken  courses  in  science  and  philosophy 2  widened  the 
breach;  for  it  tended  to  produce  rabbis  having  only  a  secular  educa- 
tion. This  had,  at  all  hazards,  to  be  prevented.  "If  rabbis,"  said3 
Keggio,  "who  are  not  philosophers  may  not  be  acceptable,  then  phi- 
losophers who  are  not  Bible  students  shall  not  be  welcomed."  He 
pointed  out  the  need  of  a  seminary  where  Jewish  theological  students 
should  be  instructed  in  rabbinical  studies  after  they  had  fulfilled  all 
requirements  imposed  upon  the  clergy  by  the  Government.4  The 
next  problem  was  to  reconcile  the  two  opposing  parties  within  the 
Jewish  body ;  and  this  could  only  be  solved  by  constructing  a  system 
that  should  obviate  in  the  future  all  discussion  concerning  the  incom- 
patibility of  religion  and  science.  "Had  I  seen  that  the  bitter  strife, 
waging  between  those  who  sought  knowledge  and  their  opponents,  had 
been  confined  to  ancient  times,  I  should  have  remained  silent.     The 

1Maskeret  Yashar,  pp.  6,  7.  *Ibid.,  p.  10.  31822. 

4  Pursuant  to  this  plea,  the  Collegium  Rabbinicum  of  Padua  was  incorporated 
in  1829. 


27 

bitterness  continues,  and  in  an  increased  measure.  .  .  .  For  Israel's 
sake,  it  is  essential  that  a  remedy  be  found  before  the  evil  be  beyond 
repair." '  This  was  the  Motif  of  Reggio' s  greatest  work,  "Ha-Torah 
we  ha-Philosophia "  (the  Law  versus  Philosophy). 

Before  treating  of  this  work,  it  may  be  well  to  say  a  word  on  two 
other  works  which  Reggio  prepared  with  the  same  end  in  view.  In 
1833  he  edited,  with  notes,  the  "Behinat  ha-Dat "  (Examen  religionis) 
of  Elijah  del  Medigo  "  for  the  purpose  of  enlightening  our  people  on 
the  bases  of  pure  religion," a  and  of  weaning  them  from  ceremonials 
and  ideas  which  he  considered  to  be  mere  survivals  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  In  1847  Reggio  edited  the  "Behinat  ha-Kabbalah"  (Examen 
traditionis)  of  Judah  (Aryeh)  de  Modena.  Both  of  these  works  had, 
centuries  before,  given  expression  to  views  that  thoroughly  coin- 
cided with  Reggio' s  own.  Of  the  two,  the  latter  is  the  more  radical. 
It  depicts  medieval  Jewish  culture  and  the  striving  of  an  individual 
to  rise  superior  to  his  environment.  In  this  volume  questions  were 
discussed  that  were  crucial  ones  for  the  scholars  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  Reggio' s  edition  caused  great  excitement,  and  estranged 
many  that  had  been  his  friends.  Some  even  suggested  that  the  story 
of  his  having  found  the  manuscript  in  Parma  in  Judah' s  own  hand- 
writing was  a  fabrication,  and  that  Reggio  had  written  the  entire 
volume.3  Reggio  emphatically  denied  this.4  "In  working  over  the 
volume,"  wrote5  Reggio,  "a  new  light  was  opened  to  me,  by  which 
I  might  publish  my  views,  how  reform  might  with  advantage  change 
some  religious  observances."  The  notes  appended  are  each  a  separate 
study,  and  contain  Reggio' s  ideas  on  the  origin  and  the  chain  of  the 
oral  law,  the  sources  of  the  Talmud,  and  the  purposes  of  its  com- 
pilers.8 

The  "  Torah  we  ha-Philosophia "  was  an  attempt  to  reconcile  the 
two  opposing  factions.  To  the  Talmudists  he  wished  to  show  that  a 
study  of  philosophy,  far  from  doing  harm,  would  assist  the  student  in 
explaining  many  obscure  points  in  Bible  and  Talmud.  The  real 
danger  lay  in  the  one-sided  study  of  both  parties.  Both  were  wrong 
in  arguing  from  a  false  premise  that  the  Talmud  interdicted  the  study 

1  Ha-Torah  we  ha-Philosophia,  Vienna,  1824,  introduction,  p.  4. 

2  Behinat  ha-Dat,  introduction,  p.  6.  8  Zikronotai,  p.  154. 
4Ozar  Nehmad,  i.  33,  35;  ii.  20.  ^Maskeret  Yashar,  p.  37. 
•Reggio  had  partially  treated  on  these  in  Jost's  Annalen,  1839,  p.  09;  1840, 

pp.  106,  114,  121,  130;  1841,  pp.  121,  130. 


28 

of  philosophy.     The  "  Torah  we  ha-Philosophia    is  divided  into  three 
parts,  which  may  be  summarised  as  follows : 

Part  1 :  The  Jews  before  the  Babylonian  exile  were  occupied  with 
the  study  of  the  Law;  and  only  when  they  came  in  contact  with  the 
people  of  other  nations — especially  with  the  Greeks  in  Alexandria — 
was  philosophy  made  known  to  them  (pp.  3-7).  The  study  of  phi- 
losophy was  never  forbidden  by  the  Talmud  (pp.  8-13).  After  the 
close  of  the  Talmud,  some  scholars  opposed  the  study  of  philosophy 
(pp.  14-18) ;  but  these  were  far  outweighed  in  importance  by  those 
who  encouraged  it  (pp.  18-24). 

Part  2 :  This  section  of  the  work  shows  that  philosophy  will  aid 
the  elucidation  of  Scripture  and  Talmud  by  doing  away  with  falsehood. 
Under  philosophy  Eeggio  includes  astronomy,  medicine,  psychology, 
logic,  ethics,  physics,  mineralogy,  botany — in  short,  all  the  sciences 
except  the  Torah  (Law). 

Part  3 :  Is  a  general  essay  on  the  reconciliation  of  Judaism  and 
philosophy. 

Good  as  were  the  intentions  of  the  author,  as  a  philosophic  study 
the  work  must  be  regarded  as  a  failure.  Its  title  does  not  fit  the 
contents.  There  is  in  it  no  philosophy,  and  but  little  Torah.1  The 
book  cannot  claim  to  rank  among  works  treating  on  the  philosophy 
of  religion ;  for  it  contains  few  passages  evidencing  depth  of  thought, 
and  such  portions  as  are  speculative  in  character  have  been  taken 
from  other  books.2  Only  in  one  place  does  the  author  acknowledge 
this, — p.  163,  in  a  note, — in  which  he  begs  the  reader  to  remember 
that  the  rest  of  the  volume  has  been  written  under  the  influence  of 
Wessely.  Levinson  has  proved 3  that  the  entire  contents  were  plagiar- 
ized; that  Eeggio  copied  the  mistakes  of  those  from  whom  he  bor- 
rowed; and  that  he  is  guilty  of  numerous  errors  in  citations  from 
secondary  sources.  These  sources  were  Dei  Eossi's  "Me' or  'Enayim," 
the  "Torat  ha-Dorot,"  Wessely' s  works  especially,  and  others  less 
important. 

As  Eeggio  lacked  originality  of  thought,  and  failed  as  a  philos- 
opher, his  importance  must  be  looked  for  elsewhere.  It  lies  in  the 
fact  that  he  was  a  profound  student,  a  thorough  scholar  in  Hebrew 

1  Libowitch,  Iggeret  Bikkoret,  New  York,  1896,  p.  13. 

2  Ibid.  ;  I.  Goldenthal,  in  Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,  Beiblatt  No. 
35,  p.  160. 

3 1.  B.  Levinson,  Jehoshaphat,  Warsaw,  1884. 


29 

grammar,  Bible,  and  Talmud,  and,  preeminently,  a  stylist.  In  this 
respect  Reggio  has  few  equals;  and  his  works  show  the  extent  to 
which  modern  Hebrew  can  be  used.  To  him  and  his  colleague  is 
due  the  purification  of  modern  Hebrew.  They  attempted  to  build 
up  a  modern  Hebrew  style  upon  the  basis  of  the  Biblical  expression, 
and  to  coin  words  where  the  Bible  did  not  offer  a  vocabulary  sufficient 
to  express  modern  thought. 

Reggio's  works  will  always  command  respect  on  account  of  their 
belles-lettristic  value.  In  studying  the  history  of  the  critical  school, 
however,  Reggio's  importance  will  be  found  to  lie  in  the  fact  that  he 
acted  as  a  medium  for  the  transmission  of  influences  other  than  his 
own.  Through  his  translations  and  commentaries  he  was  the  herald 
of  a  new  school  for  Italy,  which  Dr.  Goldenthal  has  well  styled '  "the 
Biurists," 2  of  whom  S.  D.  Luzzatto  was  by  far  the  most  important. 

In  all  his  works  Eeggio  stimulated  investigation.  He  was  for 
Italy  what  Krochmal  was  in  a  much  greater  degree  for  the  North. 

CHAPTER   V 

SAMUEL  DAVID  LUZZATTO 

Of  far  greater  powers  than  Reggio  was  Samuel  David  Luzzatto 
(Shedal);  born  in  Trieste,  August  22,  1800;  died  at  Padua,  Sep- 
tember 29,  1865.  Like  many  of  his  colleagues,  Luzzatto  descended 
from  a  family  renowned  for  its  scholars,  of  whom  Moses  Hayyim 
Luzzatto  (1707-1747),  mystic,  poet,  and  dramatist,  was  the  most 
eminent.  Samuel's  father,  by  trade  a  turner,  was  extremely  poor,  but 
very  pious.  Having  lost  two  elder  children,  he  superstitiously  hoped 
to  rear  Samuel  by  training  him  religiously. 

When  only  three  and  a  half  years  old,  Samuel  was  sent  to  school; 
at  seven  he  began  the  study  of  Job.  His  love  for  Hebrew  soon  made 
itself  evident;  even  at  that  early  age  the  future  grammarian  and 
Biurist  was  beginning  to  develop.  Young  as  he  was,  he  felt  the 
need  of  newer  and  better  Bible  commentaries  than  the  ones  which 
were  ordinarily  used  by  the  Jews ;  and  to  his  companions  he  confided 

1  Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,  Beiblatt  No.  36,  p.  163. 

2  Biur  denotes  "explanation,"  and  is  the  name  for  Mendelssohn's  commentary 
on  the  Pentateuch.  The  aim  of  these  "  Biurists  "  was  to  give  a  simple  explanation 
of  the  text. 


30 

the  hope  that  some  day  he  would  write  even  a  better  commentary  than 
Eashi  had  written.1  At  the  age  of  eleven  he  tested  his  powers  by 
composing  a  Hebrew  grammar  in  Italian,  and  by  writing  some  notes 
on  the  Pentateuch ;  and  at  one  and  the  same  time  he  was  engaged  in 
the  study  of  Hebrew,  Italian,  German,  French,  Latin,  mathematics, 
and  history. 

The  death  of  his  mother  in  1814  was  a  turning-point  in  Luzzatto' s 
life.  His  straitened  circumstances  necessitated  his  leaving  school  to 
take  care  of  the  household;  and  he  was  frequently  called  upon  to 
assist  his  father  in  providing  bread  for  the  family.  These  years  of 
trial,  which  might  easily  have  been  fatal  to  his  mental  progress, 
proved  in  reality  a  decided  blessing.  Left  to  himself  most  of  the 
time,  he  reflected  upon  his  own  and  upon  Israel's  future.  Studying 
unflaggingly,  though  without  guide,  without  library,  and  without 
means,  he  read  whatever  book  chance  put  in  his  way.  Thus  he 
perused  the  works  of  Soave,  Condillac,  and  Locke,  commenced  to 
collect  works  on  Hebrew  poetry  and  to  study  its  forms,  especially  the 
sonnet,  and  tried  his  strength  at  composition. 

His  father,  thinking  the  boy  indolent,  urged  upon  him  the  neces- 
sity of  learning  some  trade  or  profession.  When  fourteen  years  old, 
Luzzatto  had  some  inclination  to  the  practise  of  medicine,  and  began 
the  preparatory  studies  for  this  calling;  but,  on  his  seeing  Buxtorf's 
"Lexicon  Talmudicum  "  and  Coccejus'  "Lexicon  Sermonis  Hebraici  et 
Chaldaici,"  his  love  for  Hebrew  conquered,  and  his  medical  studies 
ceased.  He  refused  to  enter  the  ministry  on  account  of  the  weakness 
of  his  voice,  and  because  he  wished  his  liberty  in  investigation  to  be 
in  no  way  restricted. 

Like  Eeggio,  Luzzatto  was  for  a  time  interested  in  the  Cabala. 
He  very  soon  saw  that  the  whole  science  rested  upon  an  unsound 
basis;  and  he  set  out  to  controvert  its  principles.5  The  Cabala,  in 
his  opinion,  had  undermined  true  knowledge.  Luzzatto  also  reached 
the  conclusion  that  even  the  Bible  was  not  free  from  errors,  and  that 
commentators,  in  their  attempts  to  rectify  such  errors,  had  fallen  into 

Luzzatto,  Autobiography  (German  translation  by  M.  Grunwald),  p.  46, 
Padua,  1882. 

2  As  early  as  1817,  in  a  treatise  entitled  Ma'amar  ha-Nikkud,  Luzzatto  gave 
his  views  on  the  age  of  the  cabalistic  book,  Zohar,  and  on  the  antiquity  of  the 
punctuation  and  vocalization  of  the  Scriptures.  Similar  material  was  published 
in  Wikkuah  'al  ha-Kabbala,  Gorizia,  1852. 


31 

others  still  graver.  His  literary  feeling  detected  the  fact  that  modern 
Hebrew  literature  was  devoid  of  all  beauty:  a  reform  was  neces- 
sary ;  and  he  resolved  to  be  one  of  the  reformers,  to  instruct  his  gen- 
eration, to  rekindle  the  love  of  purity  and  terseness,  to  regenerate  the 
Hebrew  language,  and  to  regulate  its  use.  He,  therefore,  resolved  to 
study  the  Bible,  in  order  to  purge  it  of  error,  and  to  instil  new  life 
into  the  dead  word.  He  determined  to  do  all  this  and  more  not  for 
personal  aggrandizement,  but  from  veneration  of  God,  out  of  respect 
and  love  for  the  Law,  and  in  token  of  gratitude  toward  his  people. 

Opportunities  to  engage  in  these  studies  soon  presented  them- 
selves. Owing  to  the  spirited  plea  of  Reggio  in  behalf  of  a  rabbin- 
ical college  and  the  subsequent  meetings  on  the  subject  in  Northern 
Italy,  a  seminary  was  founded  in  Padua  in  1829,  to  afford  young  men 
a  systematic  and  scientific  training  in  theological  studies;  and  to 
Luzzatto,  whose  ability  had  by  this  time  been  recognized,  was  given 
the  chair  of  philology,  hermeneutics,  and  Biblical  exegesis. 

This  was  the  crowning-point  of  Luzzatto' s  life:  fame  was  his; 
students  came  to  him  from  all  quarters;  and  scholars  sought  his 
friendship  and  his  counsel.  His  professional  position  gave  Luzzatto 
independence,  and  enabled  him  to  devote  the  rest  of  his  life  to  his 
studies.  "All  my  days,"  he  wrote,1  "my  soul  longed  to  investigate 
history  .  .  .  but  I  saw  that  such  investigation  required  more  books 
than  were  in  my  possession,  and  therefore  I  applied  myself  to  lin- 
guistic research." 

The  preparation  for  his  college  work  led  him  for  a  time  to  the 
almost  exclusive  study  of  the  Bible  and  the  Hebrew  grammar.  Later 
in  life,  the  general  inclination  of  scholars  toward  historical  investiga- 
tion, the  repeated  requests  from  students  for  information,  and  espe- 
cially the  influence  of  the  works  of  Zunz  and  Eapoport,  induced  him 
to  enter  the  lists  of  the  students  of  Jewish  history — with  what  suc- 
cess is  well  known. 

Luzzatto' s  name  first  became  prominent  through  contributions  to 
the  "Bikkure  ha-'Ittim,"  which  were  marked  by  elegance  of  style 
and  poetic  genius.  His  first  noteworthy  publication  was  the  "  Kinor 
Na'im  " a  (A  Pleasant  Harp),  a  collection  of  Hebrew  poems,  mainly 

1  Letters  of  Luzzatto,  p.  166. 

2  Vol.  i.,  composed  at  the  age  of  fifteen,  Vienna,  1825;  vol.  ii.,  posthumous, 
Padua,  1879. 


32 

translations  from  the  Italian  and  the  Latin.  In  1821  had  appeared  a 
translation  into  Italian  of  a  German  prayer-book,  which  added  little 
to  his  means,  but  much  to  his  fame.  Luzzatto's  reputation  rests 
upon:  (1)  The  style  of  his  prose  writings  as  well  as  of  his  poetical 
works ;  (2)  his  grammatical  and  linguistic  works ;  (3)  his  writings  on 
Biblical  exegesis ;  and  (4)  his  historical  studies. 

Throughout  his  life,  Luzzatto  took  for  his  guide  the  words  of  La 
Bruyere:  "He  who  in  his  composition  pays  attention  only  to  the 
taste  of  his  century,  thinks  more  of  his  person  than  of  his  production. 
One  should  always  strive  for  perfection.  That  justice  which  contem- 
poraries deny  will  then  be  granted  by  posterity."  *  With  these  in 
mind,  he  went  forth  to  battle  with  the  Middle-Age  Hebrew  which 
was  still  in  use.  In  this  he  rendered  modern  Hebrew  a  great  service. 
By  nature  a  poet,  he  sought  to  introduce  form  into  the  Hebrew  prose 
of  his  day.  All  his  writings  are  marked  by  a  thorough  appreciation 
of  sentence-form.  Few  could  "  be  compared  to  Luzzatto  in  the  ability 
to  penetrate  into,  the  shrine  of  the  Hebrew  language ;  before  him  lay 
open  its  secrets  and  the  beauty  of  force  ...  he  soared  high,  and 
elevated  our  souls  by  the  beauty  of  his  explanations  and  the  pleasant- 
ness of  his  poems. " 2 

As  a  grammarian  and  linguist  Luzzatto  had  no  equal  among  his 
contemporaries.  His  knowledge  was  drawn  from  a  close  study  of  the 
Masorah,  of  the  Jewish  grammarians  and  exegetes,  of  the  Talmud, 
the  Targumim,  and  other  sources.  He  paid  particular  attention  to 
the  study  of  roots  and  derivatives,  their  generic  and  applied  meaning ; 
also  to  word  usage,  especially  the  use  of  synonyms.  In  his  study  of 
the  latter 3  he  was  assisted  by  a  similar  study  of  Wessely,4  but  pushed 
his  investigation  much  further  than  Wessely  had  done.  By  the  nice 
distinctions  he  drew,  he  showed  Hebrew  writers  how  they  might  per- 
fect modern  Hebrew. 

Luzzatto's  chief  grammatical  works  are:  "Prolegomeni  ad  una 
Grammatica  della  Lingua  Ebraica " b  (Padua,  1836);    "Grammatica 

1  Autobiography.,  ibid. ,  p.  76. 

2  D.  Kaufmann  in  the  introduction  to  his  letters ;  Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  163. 
zBikkure  ha-'Ittim,  vi.  25;  vii.,  147,  151;  viii.,  86,  141,  149,  154;  ix.,  82. 

Kerem  Hemed,  ii.  162.     Bet  ha-Ozar,  ii.,  Przemysl,  1888. 

4Geiger's  Jiidische  Zeitschrift  fur  Wissenschaft  und  Leben,  iv.  6. 

5  Translated  by  S.  Morais  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Jewish  Theological  Semi- 
nary Association  of  New  York,  vol.  v. 


33 

della  Lingua  Ebraica "  (Padua,  1853-4);  and  "Ma'amer  Biyesode  ha- 
Dikduk  "  ("Elementi  Grammaticali  del  Caldeo  Biblico"),  1865.1  Not 
only  are  his  grammatical  and  linguistic  contributions  to  be  found  in 
the  works  just  cited,  but  throughout  his  writings  are  scattered  sug- 
gestions and  notes  invaluable  for  the  study  of  Hebrew. 

Luzzatto  was  one  of  the  first  to  draw  the  attention  of  scholars  to 
the  necessity  of  being  acquainted  with  the  grammatical  constructions 
of  the  Aramaic  portions  of  the  Bible  and  the  Targumim.  His  Ara- 
maic studies  led  him  to  pay  special  attention  to  the  Targum  Onke- 
los,  the  result  of  which  was  the  "Oheb  Ger"a  (Philoxenus).  The 
"Oheb  Ger"  was  a  study  of  the  text  and  methods  of  Onkelos,  and 
an  attempt  to  correct  some  of  the  errors  that  had  crept  in  through  the 
carelessness  of  copyists.  In  the  "  Oheb  Ger,"  Luzzatto  followed  the 
idea  of  Dei  Eossi,3  that,  despite  the  fact  that  in  both  Talmuds  and  in 
the  Midrashic  literature  the  same  stories  circulated  about  Onkelos  and 
Aquila,  the  two  were  separate  individuals.  Rapoport  attacked  Luz- 
zatto for  accepting  this  view,  and  argued  that  there  was  no  historical 
personage  by  the  name  of  Onkelos,  but  that  when  the  need  of  an 
Aramaic  translation  of  the  Bible  was  felt,  Aquila' s  Greek  version, 
which  had  found  favor  with  the  Babylonian  doctors,  was  by  them 
retranslated  into  Aramaic.  In  the  change  from  Greece  to  Babylo- 
nia, "  Aquila  "  became  "  Onkelos  " — a  mere  phonetic  change.  Luz- 
zatto afterward  discarded  his  theory  and  accepted  that  advanced  by 
Rapoport.4 

Luzzatto' s  work  in  the  Chaldaic  grammar  has  a  certain  worth,  in 
that  it  was  the  first  attempt  to  write  a  grammar  for  the  Aramaic 
idiom  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud.  But  his  grammatical  writings 
lack  depth,  because  Luzzatto  did  not  possess  a  knowledge  of  all  the 
Semitic  languages.  This  often  makes  his  grammatical  work  one- 
sided. 

The  keynote  of  all  Luzzatto' s  work,  and  of  his  Biblical  criticism 

in  particular,  is  sounded  in  the  words  of  a  letter  written  by  him 5  to 

Rapoport  on  the  occasion  of  the  latter' s  seventieth  birthday:  "Truly 

thou   knowest   that  every  nation  dwelling  within  certain  definite 

1  Translated  into  English  by  J.  S.  Goldammer,  New  York,  1876. 
9  Vienna,  1830.    Luzzatto  may  be  playing  both  on  the  name  of  his  son,  Phi- 
loxenus, and  upon  the  name  "  Onkelos  ha-Ger  "  (Onkelos  the  proselyte) . 
3Me'or  'Enayim,  chap.  xlv.  4Bernfeld,  Toledot  Shir,  p.  53. 

5  Letters  of  Luzzatto,  p.  370. 

3 


34 

boundaries  may  exist  without  faith.  Israel,  scattered  to  the  four  cor- 
ners of  the  earth,  has  existed  to  this  day  only  by  virtue  of  strict 
adherence  to  its  faith.  Should  Israel  cease  to  believe  that  the  Law 
is  divine,  it  must  cease  to  be  a  people.  The  name  of  Israel  will 
then  no  longer  be  remembered,  but,  like  all  small  streams,  it  will 
eventually  be  engulfed  in  the  great  sea." 

Luzzatto  deprecated  anything  that  tended  toward  a  fusion  be- 
tween the  Jew  and  his  Christian  neighbor ;  and  he  opposed  the  eman- 
cipation of  the  Jew,  lest  by  it  Israel  should  lose  its  individuality  and 
identity.  The  same  dread  manifests  itself  throughout  the  greatest 
part  of  his  commentaries.  He  wanted  to  save  Israel ;  to  rebuild,  not 
to  destroy  it.  Every  suggestion  that  tended  to  infringe  upon  Israel's 
identity  he  abhorred  and  religiously  avoided.  This  abhorrence 
drew  a  sharp  line  of  demarcation  between  him  and  the  German 
Biblical  school.  "I  hate  modern  German  criticism,"  said  he,1  "yet 
I  love  the  true  critic.  The  difference  between  their  views  and  mine 
springs  from  this,  namely,  that  their  investigation  is  not  born  within 
them,  but  comes  from  without ;  therefore  they  place  no  limit  to  their 
denial.  My  investigation  has  come  from  out  of  the  Bible,  and  the 
love  of  truth  is  its  foundation.  Wherefore,  all  the  spirits  of  the 
world  could  not  move  me  from  my  faith."  Luzzatto' s  chief  studies 
on  the  Bible  and  on  Judaism  are:  "Mishthaddel,"  a  fragmentary 
commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  Vienna,  1847;  a  commentary  on 
the  Pentateuch,  Padua,  1871-76;  another  on  Isaiah,  1857-67; 
"Perushe  Shedal,"  a  commentary  on  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Proverbs, 
and  Job,  Lemberg,  1876;  "Yesode  ha-Torah"2  (Elements  of  the 
Law),  Przemysl,  1880;  "II  Giudaismo  illustrato "  (vol.  i.,  Padua, 
1848;  vol.  ii.,  ibid.,  1852),  and  a  translation  of  the  greater  part  of 
the  Bible  in  "La  Sacra  Biblia  volgarizzata  da  S.  D.  L.,"  Eovigo, 
1866-75. 

In  his  Biblical  criticism,  Luzzatto' s  aim  was  to  be  like  Eashi 
and  Eashbam  (Samuel  ben  Meir,  a  grandson  of  Eashi),  simple  and 
direct  without  perplexing  his  readers.3    "I  write  my  words  with  the 

1  Letters  of  Luzzatto,  p.  698  ;  Weiss,  ibid.,  p.  165. 

2  Luzzatto  began  in  1841,  a  translation  of  the  Yesode  ha-Torah  to  be  pub- 
lished in  the  Giudaismo  illustrato  (part  ii.),  which  was,  however,  withheld  by  the 
censor.  It  was  partially  published  in  Italian  in  Educatore  Israeleta,  1853 ;  cf. 
Yesode  ha-Torah,  edited  by  Eisig  Graber,  p.  5,  Lemberg,  1880. 

3  Letters,  p.  157. 


35 

triteness  and  brevity  of  Eashi  and  those  ancient  Jews  of  whose 
fountain  I  drank  and  continue  to  drink."  ' 

In  criticism,  unfortunately,  Luzzatto's  religious  training  would 
not  allow  him  to  go  beyond  certain  limits.  He  had  begun  his  critical 
career  boldly ;  but  timidity  and  the  uncertainty  whither  his  skepti- 
cism would  lead  him  made  him  retrace  his  steps.  When  twenty-one 
years  old,  he  had  passed 2  judgment  on  Ecclesiastes,  which  book  he 
regarded  as  not  having  been  written  by  Solomon.  Its  author  may 
Lave  been  an  alien ;  for  its  theme  is  entirely  non- Jewish.  In  order 
to  gain  for  it  admittance  into  the  Canon,  changes  and  additions  were 
necessary  to  tone  down  its  pessimism.  In  these  changes  and  addi- 
tions were  to  be  seen  the  hands  of  the  later  compilers.  Had  Luz- 
zatto  continued  to  be  skeptical  in  like  measure  with  reference  to  the 
other  Biblical  books,  he  would  have  wrought  a  great  benefit  for  the 
Bible ;  for  there  was  no  other  scholar  of  his  day  with  such  capabilities 
for  this  particular  work. 

Herein  lies  Luzzatto's  inconsistency.  The  method  he  employed 
for  Ecclesiastes  he  rejects  when  commenting  on  the  rest  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Hence,  he  sees  in  no  portion  of  the  Bible  traces  of  Maccabean 
influence.  The  suggestion  that  a  second  Isaiah  existed — first  pro- 
pounded by  Ibn  Ezra  and  supported  by  Krochmal  and  Eapoport — he 
repudiates.  The  entire  Book  of  Isaiah  was  written  by  the  same  hand ; 
chapters  xl.  to  the  end,  instead  of  being  descriptive  of  past  events, 
he  considered  to  be  prophetic  revelations  of  the  future.  Luzzatto 
firmly  believed  that  the  Pentateuch  was  a  unit,  dating  from  the  time 
of  Moses. 

The  importance  of  Luzzatto's  criticism  does  not  lie  in  these  views, 
but  in  the  method  of  his  dealing  with  the  text.  His  attention  had 
been  directed 3  to  the  text  of  the  Bible  in  his  study  at  school ;  and 
in  Jewish  literature  he  found  repeated  references  to  the  antiquity 
of  the  vocalization  and  accentuation  of  the  Bible,  the  gist  of  which 
was  that  though  the  text  was  read  as  we  have  it  now,  the  systems 
of  vowel-points  and  accents  did  not  exist  in  the  time  of  the  Talmud. 

With  this  as  a  starting-point,  Luzzatto  reared  his  system  of  text- 
ual emendation.  Error  could  have  crept  into  the  text  during  the 
change  from  the  ancient  to  the  square  characters,  and  also  through 
the  carelessness  of  scribes.     The  extent  of  the  errors  in  the  text 

1  Ibid. ,  p.  756.  '  Ozar  Nekmad,  iv.  47.  *  Autobiography,  p.  61. 


36 

differed  in  various  portions  of  the  Bible.1  Owing  to  the  jealous  care 
with  which  the  Pentateuch  had  been  surrounded  throughout  the  ages, 
error  could  not  have  crept  into  the  text  of  those  books ;  but  the  rest 
of  the  Scriptures  had  not  been  so  carefully  guarded,  and  there  error 
could  easily  have  found  an  entrance.  In  no  place,  however,  was  it 
wrong  to  change  either  accents  or  vowel-points.8  The  changes  that 
Luzzatto  suggested  in  the  text  prove  that  he  was  not  dogmatic  in  his 
criticism.  So  excellent  were  many  of  his  emendations,  which  he  was 
the  first  to  offer,  that  he  had  the  good  fortune  to  see  many  of  them 
accepted  by  scholars  during  his  lifetime. 

Though  his  work  at  the  college  was  devoted  mainly  to  a  study  of 
linguistics  and  of  the  Bible,  it  did  not  claim  all  his  attention.  Luz- 
zatto was  the  greatest  Hebrew  scholar  in  Italy ;  and  his  library  was 
stored  with  the  richest  historical  treasures.  Of  these,  numbers  of 
scholars,  by  the  kindness  of  Luzzatto,  availed  themselves  freely,  and 
many  of  the  most  prominent  members  of  the  Jewish  Historico-Crit- 
ical  School  received  from  this  source  most  valuable  help.  Much  of 
the  information  in  Zunz's  histories  of  the  synagogue  poetry  was 
obtained  from  Luzzatto;  and  Zunz  acknowledges  this  debt  in  the 
introduction  to  his  "  Literaturgeschichte. " 3  How  extensive  was  the 
direct  assistance  to  scholars  given  by  Luzzatto  in  this  way  can  never 
be  known. 

Urged  by  numerous  and  repeated  requests,  Luzzatto  resolved  to 
undertake  some  historical  research  for  himself,  and  to  gather  material 
for  the  study  of  the  history  and  literature  of  the  Jews  in  Spain  and 
France  during  the  Middle  Ages,  the  documents  for  which  he  knew 
were  to  be  sought  for  in  Italy,  whither  the  unfortunate  Jews  had 
carried  them  after  the  persecutions  of  the  Inquisition.  In  1840  he 
published  the  "  Be  thulat  BatYehudah"  (Virgo  'filia  Jehicdah,  Prague, 
1840),  a  collection  of  poems  from  a  diwan  of  Judah  ha-Levi,  with 
preface  and  notes.  In  1864  (Lyck)  he  edited  an  entire  diwan — the 
manuscript  of  which  he  discovered — by  the  same  author,  with  notes, 
emendations,  and  correct  punctuation.  In  the  knowledge  of  Jewish 
poetry  in  general  Luzzatto  excelled;4  and  in  that  of  piyyutim,  or 
synagogue  poetry,  he  ranked  close  to  Zunz. 

1  Letters,  pp.  13,  172,  183  ;  Kerem  Hemed,  iii.  178.  *  Letters,  p.  367. 

3  See  also  Zunz,  Zur  Geschichte  und  Literatur  (1845) ,  p.  5 ;  Steinschneider, 
Bibliographisches  Handbuch,  p.  xxxi.,  Leipsic,  1859;  idem,  Catalogus  Librorum 
hebroeorwn  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  p.  xliv.  4Ahiasaf,  1900,  p.  337. 


37 

Throughout  the  latter  part  of  his  life  Luzzatto  published  fre- 
quently, either  in  the  periodicals  or  in  book-form,  historical  data 
from  which  "the  history  of  the  Middle  Ages  received  its  authentica- 
tion, its  firm  basis,  its  coloring,  and  its  exposition." ' 

CHAPTEK  VI 

LEOPOLD  ZUNZ 

Of  the  little  band  of  Jewish  scholars  in  Germany,  the  one  whose 
erudition  was  the  widest,  whose  constructive  power  and  consequent 
influence  were  the  greatest,  was  Lipman  Yom-Tob  Zunz,  or,  as  better 
known,  Leopold  Zunz.  To  a  certain  extent  his  name  has  become 
synonymous  with  the  whole  movement.  Eapoport  alone  may  be 
considered  his  equal  in  critical  acumen,  but  was  far  behind  him  in 
the  breadth  of  his  view  and  in  his  faculty  of  presentation.  Written 
in  German,  with  much  warmth  and  with  literary  ability, — despite 
what  the  late  Paul  de  Lagarde  had  to  say  on  this  subject, — his  works 
have  certainly  exercised  a  greater  influence  than  those  of  any  of  his 
coworkers. 

For  him  tradition  is  reliable  only  in  so  far  as  it  can  be  shown  to 
be  trustworthy  and  in  accord  with  historical  data.  A  science  of 
Jewish  history  must  be  built  up  in  a  logical  manner,  if  the  reproach 
is  to  be  completely  taken  away  from  the  Jews.  "If  there  be  an 
ascending  scale  of  affliction,"  he  wrote,  "  Israel  has  reached  its  highest 
grade.  If  the  duration  of  pain,  and  the  patience  with  which  that 
pain  is  borne  ennoble,  the  Jew  may  vie  with  the  nobility  of  all 
nations.  If  a  literature  which  possesses  few  classical  tragedies  shall 
be  considered  rich,  what  recognition  should  be  given  to  a  tragedy 
which  was  composed  during  fifteen  centuries  and  presented  by  the 
heroes  themselves?"8  "If  men  recognize  that  Israel  has  a  history, 
a  philosophy,  and  a  poetic  literature,  like  other  nations,  they  will 
grant  the  Jew  the  right  of  mental  and  spiritual  equality  .  .  .  Mutual 
understanding  and  good-fellowship  will  follow.  The  admission  of  the 
claims  of  Israel's  science  and  literature  will  result  in  a  concession  of 
equality  of  rights  to  Jews  in  practical  life." 3 

1  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  xi.  502;  English  translation,  v.  625. 
9 Die  Synagogale  Poesie,  p.  9,  Berlin,  1855. 
zZur  Geschichte  und  Literatur,  1845,  p.  21. 


38 

Zunz  did  not,  like  Krochmal,  turn  his  thoughts  to  transcendental 
speculation.  Philosophy,  whether  religious  or  purely  ethical,  was 
not  his  chosen  field  of  work.  Like  Eapoport,  he  contented  himself 
with  the  critical  study  of  history.  He  never  wrote  a  complete  account 
of  his  people,  though  it  was  his  intention  to  do  so.1  Upon  the 
appearance  of  Jost's  history  of  the  Jews,  which  anticipated  the  work 
Zunz  had  hoped  to  do,  Zunz  gave  up  the  idea  of  writing  a  history  of 
Israel  and  applied  himself  to  special  studies,  the  foundation-stones 
upon  which  a  perfect  history  of  Israel  should  at  some  future  time  be 
reared.  He  presented  to  scholars  exhaustive  studies  of  many  phases 
of  that  history ;  by  numerous  articles  and  countless  notes  he  directed 
the  study  of  most  if  not  all  of  its  departments.  Zunz's  importance 
lies  in  the  complete  revolution  that  his  articles  and  books  wrought  in 
the  study  of  Jewish  history.  Without  his  books  at  hand,  no  student 
of  Jewish  history  and  literature  may  proceed. 

Zunz,  who  was  descended  from  an  old  and  honorable  family  that 
had  early  settled  in  the  region  of  the  Ehine,  near  Frankfort,  was  born 
at  Detmold,  in  the  principality  of  Lippe,  Germany,  August  10,  1794; a 
died  1886.  Among  his  ancestors  were  many  rabbis  and  men  well 
informed  in  Hebrew  letters.3  At  the  death  of  his  father,  in  1802, 
Leopold  was  sent  to  Wolfenbuttel  to  attend  the  free  Talmud  Torah, 
later  transformed  into  the  Samson  Free  School.  Here  he  met  his 
colleague,  the  later  historian,  Isaac  Marcus  Jost.  The  two  boys  imme- 
diately became  warm  friends.  In  a  squalid  and  uncongenial  atmos- 
phere, surrounded  by  strangers,  instructed  by  a  master  who  knew 
little  more  than  these  his  pupils,  they  confided  to  each  other  their 
dreams;  painting  bright  visions  of  Israel's  future,  and  evoking  plans 
by  which  Jewish  learning  should  be  more  generally  cultivated.  By 
hard  work,  diligence,  and  fortitude,  they  accomplished  more  outside 
than  inside  the  class-room.  The  institute  was  by  no  means  a  model 
one.4  In  order  to  have  light,  by  means  of  which  they  could  devote 
part  of  the  night  to  study,  the  two  boys  carefully  collected  the  drip- 

1  Steinschneider,  in  the  Introduction  to  the  second  edition  of  the  Gottes- 
dienstliche  Vortrage,  Frankfort-on-the-Main,  1892,  p.  14. 

2 The  name  "Zunz."  as  Zunz  himself  averred,  is  derived  from  a  town  in  the 
Ehine  provinces;  possibly  from  Zonz  bei  Neuss  (Monatsschrift  filr  Geschichte  des 
Judenthums,  xxxviii.  494,  note  4. 

3  Ibid,  pp.  482,  483,  495 ;  Rabbinowitz,  Life  of  Zunz,  p.  20,  Warsaw,  1896 ; 
Chotzner,  Ot  Zikkaron,  p.  1,  Berlin,  1891. 

4Zirndorf,  Jost  und  seine  Freunde,  pp.  96  et  seq. 


39 

pings  from  the  wax  "  Jahrzeit "  lights  which  mourners  placed  in  the 
synagogue,  and  fashioned  them  into  candles.1  Together  they  studied 
Talmud,  pored  over  the  contents  of  the  "Yosippon,"3  and  read  Greek 
and  Latin. 

While  yet  in  the  institute,  Zunz  gave  evidence  of  a  marvelous 
memory,  of  phenomenal  critical  insight,  of  exceptional  wit,  of  exact- 
ness in  study,  and  of  a  habit  of  carefully  collecting  and  arranging  his 
notes  for  future  use.  From  the  Samson  School,  he  went  to  the  gym- 
nasium at  Wolfenbuttel, — the  first  Jew  in  Germany  to  enter  a  higher 
institute.  Thence  in  1815  he  went  to  the  University  of  Berlin. 
From  now  on  till  his  death,  with  but  few  exceptions,  he  was  a  resi- 
dent of  Berlin.  At  the  University  he  pursued  courses  under  Schleier- 
macher,  De  Wette,  Friedrich  August  Wolf,  August  Boeckh,  and 
Savigny.  Having  no  source  of  income,  he  had  to  work  hard  to 
defray  his  expenses.  At  one  time  (November,  1815,  to  March, 
1818)  we  find  him  an  inmate  of  the  household  of  Henrietta  Herz — 
probably  as  tutor.3  Again  he  is  found  officiating  in  a  private  syna- 
gogue erected  in  Berlin  by  J.  H.  Beer.  His  career  as  a  clergyman, 
however,  was  brought  to  a  sudden  close  by  a  royal  edict  forbidding 
sermons  or  services  to  be  delivered  or  held  in  the  vernacular.  A 
volume  of  his  sermons,  published  in  1823  (2d  ed.,  1846),  shows  that 
the  scholar  had  a  fervent  religious  mind;  these  sermons  are  among 
the  best  preached  in  the  synagogue  at  a  time  when  the  use  of  the 
vernacular  for  such  purposes  was  only  commencing  to  be  felt  in  the 
Synagogue. 

The  ministry,  however,  was  not  entirely  to  Zunz's  liking.4  He 
saw  it  brought  him  no  nearer  his  goal,  and  gave  him  no  scope  for  the 
work  he  desired  to  do. 

By  nature  Zunz  was  very  versatile,  and  when  the  ministry  was 
no  longer  attractive,  he  became  a  journalist.  The  initial  steps  in  this 
career  had  been  taken  in  1819  by  the  organization  of  the  "  Verein  fur 
Cultur  und  Wissenschaft  der  Juden."     Assisted  by  an  enthusiastic 

1  Rabbinowitz,  I.  c,  p.  23 ;  Karpeles,  Jewish  Literature  and  Other  Essays,  p. 
321,  Philadelphia,  1895. 

9  A  popular  history  of  the  Second  Temple,  compiled  from  an  Arabic  transla- 
tion of  the  Book  of  Maccabees  and  a  Latin  translation  of  Josephus. 

3S.  Maybaum,  Aus  dem  Leben  von  L.  Zunz  (Zwblfter  Bericht  iiber  die  Lehran- 
staltf.  d.  Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums  in  Berlin),  p.  3,  Berlin,  1894. 

4  After  1822.  except  for  a  few  months  in  1835  spent  as  preacher  in  Prague, 
Zunz  had  nothing  to  do  with  ministerial  duties. 


40 

band  called  "Young  Israel,"  in  which  were  notably  Edward  Ganz, 
Moses  Moser,  and  later,  Heinrich  Heine  and  Emanuel  Wolf,  Zunz  was 
foremost  among  those  who  were  attempting  to  so  remodel  Jewish 
religious  practise  as  to  make  it  harmonize  with  modern  life.  His 
object  was  reform;  not  only  reform  in  the  Temple  service,  but  reform 
in  the  social  status  of  the  Jew.  By  a  systematic  training  of  the 
young,  through  the  founding  of  schools,  colleges,  and  seminaries,  he 
hoped  to  dispel  ignorance  and  to  open  for  the  Jew  entrance  to  all 
occupations.  Greater  toleration,  he  believed,  would  thus  result ;  and 
toleration  being  once  established,  emancipation  must  follow.  To 
accomplish  all  this,  an  organ  for  propaganda  was  needed.  In  1822, 
edited  by  Zunz,  the  "Zeitschrift  fur  die  Wissenschaft  des  Juden- 
thums  " '  appeared. 

The  ideals  of  the  organization  were  too  high  and  somewhat  in  ad- 
vance of  the  times.  After  its  third  number  the  issue  of  the  periodi- 
cal ceased,  the  "Verein"  being  disbanded.  Zunz's  disappointment  at 
the  failure  of  his  project  was  keen.  "  I  am  so  disheartened  that  I  can 
nevermore  believe  in  Jewish  reform  .  .  .  many  a  change  of  season 
will  pass  over  this  generation  and  leave  it  unchanged  .  .  .  The 
only  imperishable  possession  rescued  from  this  deluge  is  the  science 
of  Judaism.  It  lives,  even  though  not  a  finger  has  been  raised  in  its 
service  since  hundreds  of  years.  I  confess  that,  barring  submission 
to  the  judgment  of  God,  I  find  solace  only  in  the  cultivation  of 
the  science  of  Judaism. " 2 

After  the  failure  of  his  first  attempt  at  journalism,  Zunz  became, 
in  January,  1824,  editor  of  the  "Spenerschen  Zeitung  in  Berlin."3 
For  eight  years  he  was  at  the  head  of  this  journal.  In  December, 
1832,  because  of  the  political  position  taken  by  the  "Zeitung,"  Zunz 
resigned  his  position  as  editor. 

In  politics  Zunz  took  an  active  interest ;  for  he  saw  therein  the 
means  of  furthering  the  emancipation  of  the  Jew.  He  sided  with  a 
liberal  form  of  government,  which  was  more  in  keeping  with  the 
hopes  he  entertained  for  Israel's  future  in  Germany.  In  united  Ger- 
many he  foresaw  the  regeneration  of  German  Judaism.  In  the  trou- 
blesome times  of  the  forties  and  sixties  he  delivered  many  stirring 

1  Most  of  the  articles  were  written  by  Zunz. 

2  Cited  by  Karpeles,  I.  c,  p.  325. 

3  S.  Maybaum,  Aus  dem  Leben  von  L.  Zunz,  p.  12. 


41 

orations.1  In  1845,  in  recognition  of  his  merit,  the  Government 
appointed  him  a  member  of  a  commission  to  devise  measures  for  the 
improvement  of  the  educational  and  the  political  condition  of  the 
Jews  in  Prussia.  In  1861  he  was  nominated  member  of  the  Reich- 
stag.2 Frequently  Zunz  was  called  to  the  Empress  Augusta,  who 
sought  his  counsel  on  social  and  charitable  questions.3  His  value 
was  also  appreciated  by  foreign  governments.  At  one  time  he  was 
approached  by  a  representative  of  the  Russian  Government  for  the 
purpose  of  ascertaining  whether  he  would  accept  a  civil  office  or  pro- 
fessorship in  Eussia.4 

From  1839  till  1849  he  was  principal  of  the  Jewish  seminary  in 
Berlin;  and  from  the  latter  year  till  his  death  in  1886,  he  received  a 
stipend  from  the  Jewish  community. 

The  clergy,  journalism,  and  politics  throw  much  light  upon  the 
many  sides  of  his  character,  and  indicate  the  diversity  of  his  interests. 
By  these  he  was  brought  into  public  notice.  But  not  for  his  work  in 
any  of  these  fields  will  his  name  be  handed  down  to  posterity :  his 
historical  studies  are  his  living  monument. 

His  first  publication  was  a  small  article,  "  Etwas  liber  die  rabbin- 
ische  Litem tur"  (1818).5  This  article  shows  a  thorough  grasp  of 
the  subject  for  one  so  young.  He  rebukes  those  who,  without  suffi- 
cient knowledge  of  Jewish  literature,  assume  that  the  Jews  through- 
out the  past  have  had  only  a  theological  literature.  Religion  always 
interested  the  Jews,  but  not  exclusively.  They  were  at  all  times 
interested  in  other  branches  of  education.  They  produced  mathema- 
ticians, philosophers,  poets,  grammarians,  jurists,  etc.  "Thank  God!  " 
exclaims  Zunz,  "times  are  changed.  Keen  and  faithful  writers  now 
spread  truth  and  enlightenment."  8  He  points  out  to  scholars  along 
what  lines  a  thorough  criticism  and  an  exact  study  of  Jewish  history 
and  literature  must  be  constructed.  The  article  contains  the  germ, 
and  in  a  measure  is  the  condensed  form,  of  all  the  departments  that 
engaged  the  attention  of  Jewish  scholars  during  the  rest  of  the  cen- 
tury.7 

Soon  after  the  appearance  of  this  essay,  Zunz  tried  his  strength  at 

1  These  are  to  be  found  in  his  Gesammelte  Schriften,  1875. 

2  Rabbinowitz,  Life  of  Zunz,  p.  297.  zlbid.,  p.  298. 
*  Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,  1895,  p.  236. 

5  Gesammelte  Schriften,  i.  1-31.  *  Etwas  iiber  d.  rabb.  Literatur,  p.  24. 

1  Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  132;  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  April,  1896,  vii.  366. 


42 

historico-geographical  and  biographical  themes.  In  the  short-lived 
"Zeitschrift  fiir  die  Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums  "  (p.  114)  appeared: 
(1)  "The  Names  of  the  Cities  of  Spain  mentioned  in  Jewish  Liter- 
ature " ;  (2)  sketch  of  the  life  of  Eabbi  Solomon  Yizhaki  (Eashi)  ■ 
(p.  277).  The  first  of  these, *when  compared  with  his  later  works, 
appears  somewhat  uninteresting;  but  it  evidences  that  thorough 
scholarship  which  characterizes  all  of  Zunz's  later  works. 

More  interesting  than  his  article  on  the  cities  of  Spain  is  his  life 
of  Eashi.2  It  was  the  first  critical  attempt  of  any  student  to  present 
biographical  material.  Zunz  treats  not  only  of  the  life  of  Eashi,  but 
of  his  commentaries  on  the  Bible  and  the  Talmud,  his  epigrammatic 
style,  his  ideas,  and  his  sources.  He  includes  the  works  of  Eashi' s 
pupils,  who  followed  the  lines  laid  down  by  their  master.  He  is  not 
satisfied  with  merely  giving  the  names  of  those  he  has  occasion  to 
mention,  but  gives  biographical  data  of  all,  and  frequently  enters  into 
lengthy  discussions  concerning  many  of  them.  This  life  of  Eashi  still 
remains  a  classic. 

Ten  years  of  hard  study  passed  between  the  appearance  of  the  life 
of  Eashi  and  Zunz's  next  publication.  During  these  years  Zunz  was 
by  no  means  inactive.  He  traveled,  visited  libraries  in  search  of 
treasures,  and  collected  material.  In  1832  appeared  his  greatest 
work,  "Die  Gottesdienstlichen  Vortrage  der  Juden,  historisch  en- 
twickelt."  Zunz  had  been  convinced  that  the  future  of  German  Juda- 
ism lay,  to  a  very  great  extent,  in  the  hands  of  the  Government.  By 
the  machinations  of  the  anti-Eeform  party,  certain  changes  necessary 
for  the  spiritual  welfare  of  the  Jews  had  been  interdicted.  As  has 
already  been  mentioned,  freedom  of  religious  service,  innovations 
which  the  times  demanded,  had  been  checked.  Zunz  felt  that  the 
sermon,  if  properly  presented,  was  the  only  means  of  withholding 
many  weak-minded  people  from  apostasy.  Let  politics  but  be 
removed  from  the  Jewish  question,  let  legislation  be  divested  of 
hatred  and  partizan  antipathies,  and  Israel  would  be  saved.  "At 
last  it  is  time  that  the  Jews  in  Europe,  especially  in  Germany, 
should  be  given,  not  rights  and  liberties,  but  right  and  liberty."3 
Civil  disabilities  account  for  the  stagnation  of  Jewish  learning  and 

1  Rashi  (1040-1105),  commentator  of  the  Bible  and  the  Talmud. 

2  Translated  into  Hebrew  by  S.  Bloch,  Lemberg,  1840. 

3  Gottesdienstliche  Vortrage,  2d  ed,  p.  v. 


43 

culture.  In  past  ages  Judaism  had  been  kept  intact  by  the  purity 
and  freedom  of  its  service,  of  which  the  homily  was  the  chief  feature. 
The  very  same  exigencies  were  felt  as  formerly.  Free  and  instruc- 
tive homilies  alone  would  insure  German  Judaism  a  bright  future. 
The  Government  was  not  sufficiently  informed  concerning  Israel's 
past  to  know  what  was  innovation.1 

Wherefore  Zunz  determined  to  show  the  civil  authorities  that 
sermons  and  services  in  the  vernacular  were  not  innovations,  but 
that  whenever  and  wherever  the  need  was  felt,  the  Jew  prayed  and 
listened  to  sermons  in  the  vernacular.  Zunz  gave  a  general  outline 
of  Jewish  history,  and  showed  that  the  lecture  or  sermon  had  lived 
throughout  the  centuries  from  Ezra  till  modern  times.  "  From  ancient 
days  we  find  that  means  have  been  found  in  the  Jewish  community, 
by  which  those  weighed  down  by  daily  care,  or  bound  by  error  and 
temptation,  may  be  brought  back  to  God.  On  Sabbath  and  festivals, 
on  holy  convocation,  prayer  was  offered  and  the  Scriptures  elucidated 
as  a  solace  to  the  sinner,  a  support  to  the  weak  ...  In  the  course 
of  time  the  Jew  had  lost  independence  and  fatherland.  Notwith- 
standing the  dissolution  of  all  other  institutions,  the  synagogue 
remained  the  only  testimony  of  Israel's  nationality  .  .  .  The  serv- 
ice in  the  synagogue  was  the  rallying-point  of  Jewish  nationality,  the 
shelter  of  the  Jewish  faith. 

"Prayer  was  offered  in  the  synagogue  for  which  every  time  and 
every  language  was  suitable." 2 

The  "  Gottesdienstliche  Vortr&ge  " 3  was  epoch-making.  It  was 
the  first  thorough  and  scientific  attempt  to  unravel  and  present  in 
good  form  the  entire  fabric  of  the  Midrashic  or  homiletic  literature. 
In  this  single  volume  is  condensed  material  which  might  have  been 
expanded  into  several.  The  author  has  charged  his  sentences  and 
notes  to  their  full  capacity.  For  this  reason,  he  never  published  a 
second  edition 4  of  this  work.  He  recognized  that  in  a  second  edition 
the  material  he  had  compressed  between  two  covers  would  have  to  be 
reworked,  and  that,  if  properly  done,  it  would  have  to  be  developed 
into  many  volumes.     This  he  refused  to  do. 

It  is  surprising  what  a  wealth  of  new  data  the  "G.  V."  contained. 

1  Gottesdienstliche  Vortrage,  pp.  v.-viii.      *Ibid.,  p.  1.      8Abbr.  "G.  V.  " 
4  A  second  edition  was  edited  in  Frankfort^on-the-Main,  1892,  by  M.  Brull 
with  an  introduction  by  Steinbchneider. 


44 

In  it  the  full  extent  of  Zunz's  information  was  shown.  By  the  flood 
of  new  data  presented,  by  fixing  dates  of  the  Midrashic  works  and  of 
Jewish  authors,  it  stimulated  students  to  continue  the  investigations 
of  the  author.  The  copious  notes  appended  to  the  "G.  V."  have  in 
themselves  given  rise  to  an  extensive  literature ;  for  these  notes  were 
later  developed  by  others  in  numerous  volumes  and  articles.  The 
work  "afforded  material  help  toward  the  comprehension  of  the  evolu- 
tion of  culture  among  the  Jews  at  successive  periods,  and  may  claim 
to  have  established  the  principles  upon  which  Jewish  history  should 
be  based." '  Despite  some  errors  in  detail  which  more  recent  research 
has  brought  to  light,  the  book,  after  seventy  years,  still  remains  the 
authority. 

Not  alone  in  the  "  G.  V. "  did  Zunz  lay  the  foundation-stones  of 
Jewish  history.  From  now  on,  one  work  after  another  appeared, — 
works  which  are  invaluable  for  a  thorough  comprehension  of  such  a 
study,  and  without  due  consideration  of  which  no  complete  history 
of  the  Jews  is  possible.  After  his  defense  of  the  sermon,  he  turned 
his  attention  to  another  practical  question.  "Jewish  and  Christian 
names  [  Vomahmen]  were  spoken  of  as  if  they  were  two  incompatible 
elements."2  The  cause  of  his  writing  the  little  pamphlet  "Namen 
der  Juden  " 3  was  the  action  of  the  Government  in  forbidding  the  Jews 
of  Germany  to  use  Germanized  names.4  "The  attention  given  to 
Jewish  names  arises,  on  the  one  hand,  from  a  desire  to  find  therein  a 
subject  for  reproach ;  on  the  other,  as  a  pretext  to  restrict  the  rights 
of  the  Jew."  6  The  Jews  appealed  to  Zunz.  In  order  the  more 
forcibly  to  present  his  plea,  he  investigated  the  origin,  the  derivation, 
and  the  meaning  of  names  borne  by  Jews :  for  "  names  contain  a 
secret  history;  they  are  histories  in  cipher  to  which  investigation 
offers  the  key." 

Zunz  showed  that  error  or  imitation  of  neighbors  determined  the 
choice  of  names,  and  that  from  very  early  times  the  Jew  had  been 
accustomed  to  drop  the  old  and  more  Biblical  names,  in  order  to 
adopt  new  ones :  he  always  bore  the  same  names  as  did  the  Chris- 
tian and  the  heathen.  Zunz  ridiculed  the  proposition  to  deprive  the 
Jew  of  the  right  of  using  any  name.     Long  before  any  of  the  German 

1  Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  135  ;  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  April,  1895,  vii.  370. 

2  Namen  der  Juden,  Leipsic,  1837;  republished  in  Gesammelte  Schriften,  ii. 
1-82.  3 December,  1836.  4I6id.,  p.  70.  5I6id.,p.  2. 


45 

states  existed  the  Jews  had  borne  German  names.  So  well  was  the 
task  done  by  Zunz  that  the  Jewish  community  presented  him  with 
a  substantial  sum  in  recognition '  of  his  labors. 

The  desire  to  benefit  a  certain  class  of  Jews  to  whom  Hebrew  was 
unknown  next  seized  hold  of  Zunz.  There  were  many  who  could  not 
read  the  Bible  in  the  original.  Translations,  it  is  true,  were  not 
wanting;  but  these  were,  in  the  main,  antiquated,  or  could  not  be 
used  because  religious  ideas  foreign  to  them  had  been  introduced  into 
the  text.  The  Mendelssohnian  Bible  in  its  day  had  served  a  good 
purpose ;  but  it  had  been  confined  to  certain  portions  of  the  Scriptures, 
it  was  expensive,  and  the  language  was  obsolete.  Zunz  feared  that 
the  use  of  translations  published  by  missionary  societies  might  cause 
havoc  in  the  Jewish  home.  To  obviate  all  difficulties  the  "  Zunzische 
Bibel "  was  published  (1837-38).  Its  aim  was  to  render  the  Hebrew 
into  pure  German  without  losing  clearness,  force,  or  elegance,  and 
without  perverting  the  context.  Associated  with  Zunz  were  Michael 
Zachs,  Julius  Furst,  and  H.  Arnheim.  The  translation  of  the  two 
books  of  Chronicles  was  left  to  Zunz.  It  is  surprising  that  so  little 
of  the  translation  was  done  by  Zunz :  the  Chronicles  are  by  no  means 
the  important  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  new  Bible  contained 
all  of  Mendelssohn's  translation  in  a  revised  form  and,  added  thereto, 
the  Prophets  and  the  Hagiographa. 

Besides  translating  and  editing  the  Bible,  Zunz  was  interested  in 
Biblical  criticism.  The  second  chapter  of  the  "G.  V."  treats  of 
"  Dibre  hajamim  oder  die  Bucher  der  Chronik  "  (the  chroniclers  of  the 
Bible).  The  material  therein  is  gathered  from  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Daniel, 
the  Psalms,  and  the  two  books  of  Chronicles.  From  the  contents  of 
these  books  Zunz  indicated  that  their  date  of  composition  could  not 
have  been  that  generally  alleged.  His  attitude  toward  Pentateuchal 
criticism,  however,  was  withheld  until  he  was  quite  old.  In 
1873-74  he  published  a  lengthy  article  styled  *  Bibelkritisches  " a  in 
which  he  ventured  to  give  his  ideas  relative  to  the  date,  the  nature, 
and  the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch,  Ezekiel,  and  Esther.  Deu- 
teronomy he  compared  with  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Esther.  Some 
parts  of  Deuteronomy,  such  as  Moses'  Blessing,  he  grants  are  old — 

1  Rabbinowitz,  Life  of  Zunz,  p.  134 ;  Chotzner,  Ot  Zikkaron,  p.  7. 
5  Gesammelte  Schriften,  i.  217-270.    Part  of  the  article  appeared  in  Z.  D.  M. 
<?.,  xxvii.  669-689. 


46 

older  even  than  Isaiah.1  On  the  whole,  Deuteronomy  is  a  very  late 
book.  His  view  regarding  Ezekiel,  whom  he  considers  the  last  of 
the  Prophets,  coincides  with  the  tradition  that  Ezekiel  was  one  of 
the  men  of  the  Great  Synod.2  Leviticus  he  compares  with  Ezekiel, 
and  shows  that  the  phraseology  of  the  former  echoes  the  latter.  "At 
the  time  of  the  composition  of  Leviticus,  the  Israelites  had  been  out 
of  Palestine  for  a  long  time," 3  and  its  date  was  a  thousand  years  later 
than  Moses.4  Deuteronomy  knows  nothing  of  Succoth,  of  the  Feast 
of  the  Trumpet,  of  the  Atonement  Day,  of  a  high  priest  and  the 
various  sacrifices.6  New  Year's  Day,  the  Day  of  Atonement,  and  the 
Feast  of  Haman  were  unknown  to  the  ancient  Jews,  and  are  due  to 
later  and  foreign  influence.6 

The  object  of  Exodus  and  Numbers  is  not  to  write  history,  but  to 
rework  old  proverbs  and  traditions.7  "The  eighty -eight  chapters  be- 
tween Moses'  song  of  triumph  in  Exodus  and  the  last  chapter  of  Num- 
bers impress  one  as  a  codex  collected  by  various  hands  and  in  various 
times,  and  compiled  from  poetic  and  historical  works,  from  laws  and 
priestly  regulations.  In  this  codex  contradiction  and  repetition  are 
as  natural  as  gradual  corrections  and  lack  of  connection.  To  us  it  is 
a  conundrum.  Therein  is  to  be  found  as  little  truly  Mosaic  material 
as  elsewhere  in  the  Bible  Davidic."  8 

Zunz's  views  of  Genesis  may  be  summed  up  in  a  few  words. 
There  are  two  series  of  writings  or  redactions  in  Genesis ;  one  using 
the  appellative  "  Elohim " ;  the  other,  YH WH.  As  to  its  date  he 
says :  "  In  fact,  Genesis  in  more  than  one  place  shows  that  it  was  com- 
posed in  the  time  of  the  Jewish  kingdom,  many  centuries  after  the 
tribes  had  established  themselves  in  Palestine."9  "The  author  of 
Genesis,  younger  than  Jacob's  Blessing,  is  hardly  older  than  the 
prophet  Isaiah." 10  These  views,  in  which  Zunz  was  no  doubt  influ- 
enced by  modern  Christian  Biblical  criticism,  were  offered  merely  as 
scientific  hypotheses,  and  were  not  meant  to  affect  the  life  and  the 
conduct  of  the  people.  He  repudiated  all  attempts  to  return  to  Mo- 
saism  "  and  all  reform  whose  object  was  solely  to  break  away  from  the 
observance  of  Jewish  tradition.  Though  a  "  severe  Biblical  critic,  his 
scientific  criticism  had  no  connection  with  the  living  practise  of  re- 

I  Gesammelte  Schriften,  i.  226.  *Idem,  p.  233.  3Idem,  p.  236. 
4  Idem,  p.  242.  *Idem,  p.  241,  No.  4.  6  Idem,  p.  242,  No.  32. 
1 1dem,  p.  245.            8  Idem,  p.  262.            9  Idem,  p.  267.            10  Idem,  p.  270. 

II  Compare  his  answer  to  Abbe-  Chiarini  in  Gesammelte  Schriften,  ii.  296-298. 


47 

ligion,  in  which  he  did  not  deviate  by  so  much  as  a  hair's  breadth 
from  the  customs  of  his  people. M ' 

His  chief  interest,  however,  was  not  centered  in  Biblical  criti- 
cism. As  a  Jew  and  as  a  sincere  critic  he  felt  himself  bound 
to  give  his  opinions  on  Biblical  questions.  History  was  his 
main  study.  Though  he  frequently  made  excursions  into  other 
fields,  as  soon  as  he  was  able  he  was  back  in  the  historical  do- 
main. 

In  1845  appeared  his  "Zur  Geschichte  und  Literatur."  In  these 
Beitrage,  his  object  is  primarily  to  show  that  Israel  has  a  historical 
past  and  that  great  men  and  telling  incidents  were  not  wanting  in 
that  past ;  that  like  all  other  people  Israel  influenced,  and  in  turn 
was  influenced  by,  others.  The  chief  excellence  of  the  book  lies  in 
the  new  data  brought  forward  relative  to  the  Tosafists  or  Glossarists 
on  the  Talmud.  Zunz  dilates  upon  the  great  medieval  authors,  but 
especially  upon  those  of  France  and  Germany,  who  wrote  ethical, 
grammatical,  and  Biblical  treatises.  The  volume  is  not  a  history  of 
the  Jews  nor  one  of  Jewish  literature,  though  it  contains  data  that 
must  be  used  in  the  composition  of  such  histories.  For  the  most 
part,  it  contains  series  of  bibliographical  and  biographical  notes  ar- 
ranged in  alphabetical  and  chronological  order. 

The  synagogue  poetry  was  the  next  subject  to  which  Zunz  gave 
his  attention.  Having  presented  a  history  of  the  homily,  he  thought 
it  advisable  to  trace  the  history  of  synagogue  poetry :  first,  to  instruct 
those  ultra-Kef orm  rabbis  who,  ignoring  the  historical  value  of  this 
poetry,  were  making  great  furrows  in  the  liturgy;  secondly,  because 
the  "  synagogue  poetry  may  be  called  the  companion  of  Jewish  his- 
tory" ; 2  and  thirdly,  because  of  its  connection  with  the  early  Mid- 
rashic  or  homiletic  literature.  For,  in  its  decay,  the  Midrash  gave 
rise  to  the  piyyut.3 

The  material  was  too  vast  to  be  condensed  into  one  volume.  The 
author,  therefore,  published  in  three  volumes  and  a  supplement  all 
the  material  available.  The  first  of  the  series  was  "Die  synagogale 
Poesie  des  Mittellaters  "  (1855),  which  was  followed,  in  1859,  by  the 
"Kitus  des  synagogale  Gottesdienstes,"  in  1865  by  "Die  Literature 

1  Weiss,  Zikronotai,  p.  148 ;  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  April,  1895,  vii.  392. 
5  Liter atur geschichte  der  synagogalen  Poesie,  1865,  p.  iii. 

3The  technical  name  for  synagogue  poetry.  The  writers  of  piyyu^im  were 
called  "piyutanim,"  "payye^anim,"  and  "poetanim." 


48 

geschichte  der  synagogalen  Poesie,"  and  in  1867  by  a  "Nachtrag  zur 
Literaturgeschichte  der  synagogalen  Poesie." J 

Great  uncertainty  reigned  in  regard  to  the  personality  and  the 
time  of  the  many  hundreds  of  poets.  Very  few  had  applied  them- 
selves to  a  study  of  synagogue  poetry.  Christians  knew  naught  of  it, 
and  Jews  were  badly  informed  in  regard  thereto.  Synagogue  poets 
who  had  become  famous  were  not  remembered  because  they  had  written 
synagogue  poetry,  but  for  some  other  quality.  Such  had  been  great 
poets,  rabbis,  Talmudists,  or  martyrs.  Carelessness  and  wilful  false- 
hood had  increased  the  chaos  in  which  the  poets  lay.  Poems  were 
ascribed  to  the  Prophets,  the  Kings,  even  to  the  Apostles.  The  same 
poem  was  frequently  attributed  to  different  authors.2  The  "Nish- 
mat  "  was  ascribed  to  Simon  ben  Shetah  and  to  St.  Peter ;  "  Ahabah 
Kabbah,"  to  the  Apostles  Paul  and  John.  In  Hebrew  literature  the 
question  of  authorship  has  always  been  a  difficult  one.  Until  recent 
times,  it  was  not  considered  dishonorable  to  give  an  article  or  a  poem 
circulation  by  affixing  thereto  the  name  of  some  famous  man.  Fur- 
thermore, there  were  numerous  poems  extant  the  names  of  whose 
authors  were  unknown. 

Therefore,  the  work  Zunz  accomplished  in  the  history  of  the  syna- 
gogue poetry — gathered  largely  as  it  was  from  manuscript — is  mar- 
velous. By  him  was  published  for  the  first  time  material  which 
could  be  found  in  no  other  book.  Its  value  for  the  history  of  the 
Jews  will  be  readily  understood.  Given  the  customs  of  any  people 
within  a  certain  period,  one  may  easily  arrive  at  the  conditions  of 
history  in  that  period.  Zunz  has  presented  to  scholars  a  history  of 
the  service  in  the  synagogue,  of  the  rise  and  nourish  of  the  payyet- 
anim,  and  of  the  gradual  modification  of  the  various  forms  of  prayer 
and  rituals,  and  has  translated  many  of  the  piyyutim  that  have  found 
their  way  into  the  rituals.  In  general,  the  payyetanim  sang  "  to  give 
to  the  service  a  polish,  to  the  deeds  of  the  fathers  a  stately  abode,  to 
the  Midrash  a  pleasing  garment,  and  to  sentiment  a  holy  expres- 
sion."3 

From  a  literary  standpoint,  Zunz  divides  the  synagogue  poets  into 

two  classes:  the  Spanish  and  the  non-Spanish.     "Those  in  Spain 

1  An  index  to  the  Literaturgeschichte  was  made  by  Gestetner,  Mafteah  ha- 
Piyyutim,  Berlin,  1889. 

'2  Literaturgeschichte  der  synagogalen  Poesie,  1865,  pp.  4-6. 
8  Synagogale  Poesie,  p.  60. 


49 

were  poets,  hence  synagogue  poets,  and  were  urged  to  tune  their  lyres 
by  poetic  endowment.  In  France,  Germany,  and  elsewhere,  they 
were  merely  celebrants  who  wrote  verse  because  their  calling  and  the 
exigencies  of  the  time  demanded  it." ' 

Zunz's  work  has  a  wider  circle  of  readers  than  that  of  Kroch- 
mal,  Kapoport,  Keggio,  and  much  of  Luzzatto's,  because  he  wrote 
mainly  in  a  modern  language.  He  was,  however,  not  unskilled  in 
the  use  of  Hebrew.  He  wrote  several  articles  in  Hebrew,  of  which 
the  most  important  is  the  "Life  of  Azariah  dei  Rossi." a  Had  he  not 
been  master  of  Hebrew,  the  illustrious  Krochmal  would  never  have 
entrusted  to  him  the  task  of  editing  the  "  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Ze- 
man." 3  When  Zunz  received  the  manuscript  it  was  a  shapeless  mass. 
Zunz  gave  it  form  and  order.  Not  satisfied  with  the  mere  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  volume,  he  wrote  an  introduction  in  Hebrew,  in  which  he 
mentions  the  difficulty  of  his  task,  criticizes  the  work  before  him, 
and  divides  it  into  its  component  parts. 

After  his  seventieth  year,  Zunz  no  longer  published  voluminous 
works.  His  powers,  however,  were  not  yet  spent :  he  was  continu- 
ally lecturing  and  writing.  The  last  works  of  importance  that  he 
published  after  his  seventieth  year  were  the  "  Bibelkritisches  "  (1874), 
already  referred  to,  and  "Die  Monatstage  des  Kalenderjahres :  ein 
Andenken  an  Hingeschiedene,"  Berlin,  1872,  in  which  he  has  re- 
corded, and  thus  saved  from  oblivion,  the  names  of  many  Jews  and 
Christians  who  assisted  the  advance  of  Judaism. 

The  work  Zunz  has  accomplished  has  been  more  or  less  severely 
criticized,  but  by  none  so  bitterly  as  by  Ludwig  Techen  4  and  his 
master,  Prof.  Paul  de  Lagarde.5  In  answer,  Dr.  A.  Berliner,6  and 
Prof.  David  Kaufmann7  showed  conclusively  that  prejudice  and 
ignorance  were  at  the  basis  of  these  criticisms.  The  ODiy  valid 
objections  of  Lagarde  and  Techen  are,  that  Zunz  might  have  arranged 
his  material  to  better  advantage  and  that  his  method  of  presentation 
might  have  been  improved.  For  Zunz  never  described  the  manu- 
scripts that  he  used,  nor  told  whence  he  obtained  them,  neither  did 

lIbid.,  p.  322.  *Kerem  Ilemed,  v.  131 ;  with  additions,  vii.  19. 

3  Edited  by  Zunz,  1851. 

4Zwei  Gbttinger  Machzorhandschriften— doctor's  dissertation,  Gottingen,1884. 

bLipman  Zunz  und  seine  Verehre,  Gottingen,  1886. 

6  Professor  Paul  de  Lagarde,  nach  seiner  Natur  gezeicknet,  Berlin,  1887. 

''Paul  de  Lagarde' s  Jiidische  Gelehrsamkeit,  Leipsic,  1887. 

4 


50 

he  indicate  from  what  codex  he  took  his  poems.1  The  lack  of  a 
proper  index  made  the  use  of  his  history  of  the  synagogue  poetry  very 
laborious.  This  difficulty,  however,  has  been  obviated  by  Gestetner's 
index,  already  cited. 

Another  objection  that  has  been  urged  against  Zunz's  work  in 
general  is  that  it  is  too  fragmentary  and  overloaded  with  notes.  Pos- 
sibly, Zunz  found  it  necessary  to  present  his  material  in  this  fashion. 
Little  was  done  in  Jewish  history  in  his  days ;  and  so  much  had  to 
be  accomplished  before  ^  complete  and  reliable  history  of  the  Jews 
could  be  written,  that  he  may  have  felt  himself  compelled  to  condense 
his  knowledge  into  notes,  one  heaped  upon  the  other. 

Whatever  criticism  may  be  advanced  against  errors  of  detail  or  of 
presentation,  the  greatness  of  Zunz  will  in  no  wise  be  diminished. 
In  1871,  fifty  years  after  he  had  received  his  degree  of  doctor  of 
philosophy,  the  University  of  Halle  presented  him  with  the  honorary 
degree  of  doctor.  In  testimony  of  the  esteem  in  which  Zunz  was 
held,  the  "Curatorium  der  Zunz-Stiftung  "  published  in  1874,  on  the 
anniversary  of  his  eightieth  birthday,  in  three  volumes,  a  collection  of 
his  minor  treatises  (Gesammelte  Schriften);  and  in  1884,  in  honor  of 
his  ninetieth  birthday,  a  number  of  scholars  published  the  Zunz  "  Ju- 
belschrift." 

By  the  depth  of  his  scholarship  and  his  many  happy  conjectures, 
Zunz  brought  to  light  a  vast  amount  of  new  material,  and  taught 
others  how  to  proceed.  "With  wonderful  art  and  brevity,  and  by 
simply  confining  himself  to  the  issues,  he  performed  his  task.  He  is 
the  historian  of  his  people ;  for  he  portrayed  the  dark  days  of  its 
calendar. " 2 

CHAPTER   VII 

ABRAHAM    GEIGER 

The  study  of  Jewish  research  in  the  nineteenth  century  would  be 
incomplete  without  taking  into  consideration  the  work  of  Abraham 
Geiger.  He  was  one  of  the  most  original  thinkers  and  critics  among 
the  Jews  that  the  century  brought  forth.  As  will  be  seen  from  the 
following  pages,  he  was  pre-eminently  a  religious  reformer  and 
Jewish  theologian.     It  may,  therefore,  be  doubted  whether  a  place 

^echen,  i&id.,pp.  17,  18;  Lagarde,  ibid.,  p.  148.  2Kadfmann,  ibid.,  p.  20. 


51 

should  be  assigned  to  him  in  the  Jewish  Historico-Critical  School. 
Though  a  theologian,  he  was,  however,  also  a  scholar,  a  critic,  a  student 
of  Jewish  history,  and,  above  all,  a  historian  of  Jewish  theology.  For 
this  reason  he  must  be  counted  among  those  who  have  helped  to  build 
up  the  science  of  Judaism. 

Geiger  was  born  May  24,  1810,  at  Frankfort-on-the-Main,  and 
died  in  Berlin,  October  23,  1874.  At  the  age  of  five,  he  is  said  to 
have  commenced  the  study  of  the  Bible,  and  at  seven  to  have  laid 
the  foundation  of  his  Talmudic  studies.1  In  his  eleventh  year  he 
was  sent  to  the  gymnasium.  It  is  somewhat  curious  to  notice  that 
even  at  this  very  early  age  his  studies  seem  to  have  rendered  him 
skeptical.  His  doubts  he  carefully  concealed;  knowing  that  the 
avowal  would  inflict  pain  upon  his  father,  a  devout  rabbi,  who  had 
been  his  early  instructor.  Skepticism  had,  however,  taken  such  a 
hold  of  him  that  at  the  death  of  his  father,  two  years  later,  he  broke 
with  traditional  Judaism  and  refused  to  acknowledge  the  Talmud  as 
an  authority  for  conduct.  In  1829  he  went  to  the  University  of 
Heidelberg,  which  he  soon  afterward  left  for  that  of  Bonn,  in  order 
to  be  under  the  instruction  of  Freytag,  one  of  the  ablest  Oriental 
scholars  of  his  day. 

Because  of  his  views,  Geiger  entertained  grave  doubts  as  to  his 
success  as  a  clergyman,  and  at  one  time  thought  of  giving  up  the  idea 
of  entering  the  pulpit.  Yet  he  saw  that  a  period  was  at  hand  which 
would  materially  change  Judaism  in  Germany,  and  that  during  the 
process  of  such  change  his  services  might  be  needed.  In  1833,  after 
much  difficulty,  he  was  elected  rabbi  of  a  congregation  in  Wiesbaden. 

Geiger  was  by  no  means  contented  to  preach  his  reforms  to  his 
congregation  only :  he  desired  a  larger  audience.  For  this  reason  he 
founded  in  1835  the  "  Wissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift  fur  judische  The- 
ologie."8  As  the  name  implies,  the  journal  was  dedicated  to  scien- 
tific research  in  Jewish  history  and  theology  and  to  the  discussion  of 
problems  of  interest  to  the  Jews  of  the  day.  It  essayed  to  instruct 
the  Jew  and  to  develop  his  esthetic  sensibilities.  In  the  attempt  to 
do  this  the  journal  had  but  three  predecessors :  the  "  Ha-Measef " 3 
(The  Gatherer),  which  was  the  earliest  venture  in  Jewish  periodical 

1  Rabbinowitz,  Life  of  Zunz,  p.  164. 

2Vol8.  i.-iv.,  Frankfort  and  Stuttgart,  1835-39;  vols,  v.-vi.,  Grunberg  and 
Leipsic,  1842-47.  8Berlin,  1783-1790. 


52 

literature  in  Germany;  the  " Zeitschrift  fiir  die  Wissenschaft  des  Ju- 
denthums," '  edited  by  Zunz,  which  has  already  been  mentioned;  and 
the  "Bikkure  ha-'Ittim"2  (Fruits  of  the  Season),  the  first  Jewish 
periodical  in  Galicia.  Later,  Geiger  edited  the  "  Judische  Zeitschrift 
fiir  Wissenschaft  und  Leben," 3  which  he  also  used  to  spread  his  ideas 
of  reform,  and  to  which,  as  well  as  to  his  earlier  journal,  the  greatest 
Jewish  savants  of  the  age  contributed. 

In  1838  Geiger  was  called  to  Breslau  as  assistant  to  Babbi  Solo- 
mon Tiktin,  the  representative  of  ultra-orthodoxy  in  Posen.  It  was 
but  natural  that  the  opposing  views  of  these  two  men  should  clash. 
The  contest  was  watched  with  interest  throughout  Germany ;  for  it 
signified  the  success  or  defeat  of  reform.  All  kinds  of  obstacles  were 
placed  before  Geiger  to  keep  him  out  of  Breslau,  even  the  Govern- 
ment being  appealed  to  for  assistance.  At  first  it  appeared  that 
Geiger  would  be  worsted ;  for,  having  been  born  in  Frankfort  and  not 
being  a  citizen  of  Prussia,  he  could  not  officiate  in  Prussia  until  he 
had  become  naturalized.  Naturalization  required  two  years'  residence. 
The  greater  part  of  these  two  years  he  spent  in  Berlin,  where  he  met 
Zunz.  Of  his  stay  in  Berlin  and  his  intercourse  with  Zunz  he  wrote : 4 
"  My  stay  in  Berlin  brought  me  much  good :  much  I  learned  from 
Zunz.  How  fortunate  I  am  that  I  have  made  him  my  companion 
and  friend !  " 

Having  become  a  citizen,  Geiger  returned  to  Breslau;  and  the 
conflict  there  was  reopened  with  renewed  vigor.  In  the  end  Tiktin 
was  displaced,  and  reform  won  the  day.  Possessed  of  a  wonderful 
flow  of  language  and  charm  of  address,  Geiger  became  the  idol  of  the 
hour.  In  1863  he  was  called  to  Frankfort,  his  native  city,  where  he 
remained  till  1870,  in  which  year  he  was  called  to  Berlin.  His  long- 
cherished  hope  was  at  last  realized.  After  many  years  of  ceaseless 
and  weary  struggles,  he  was  in  Germany's  greatest  center,  rabbi  of 
one  of  the  most  important  Jewish  congregations,  docent  at  the  newly 
established  Babbinical  "Hochschule  fiir  die  Wissenschaft  des  Juden- 
thums,"  a  leader  in  the  reform  movement,  and  a  scholar  recognized 
by  his  peers. 

Geiger  felt  that  the  greatest  impediment  to  the  advance  of  Juda- 

1  1822-23.  2 Partly  in  German,  partly  in  Hebrew;  12  vols.,  1821-1831. 

3  Breslau,  1862-1874. 

4 Nachgelassene  Schriften,  v.,  letter  35,  pp.  146-150.  Owing  to  the  radical 
views  of  Geiger,  the  two  scholars  later  became  estranged. 


53 

ism  lay  in  the  divergence  of  opinion  among  the  rabbis.  Each  clergy- 
man interpreted  Judaism  in  accordance  with  his  purely  personal 
considerations.  The  future  welfare  of  Israel  demanded  that  these  per- 
sonal elements  be  removed.  This  could  be  accomplished  only  by  the 
adoption  of  some  general  plan  and  the  establishment  of  an  authorita- 
tive body  which  should  define  the  essence  of  Judaism.  As  early  as 
1837  he  was  active  in  bringing  together  such  a  body.  In  the  influ- 
ence he  exerted  on  the  later  conference  of  Jewish  rabbis,  Geiger  was 
one  of  the  foremost  workers  for  Reformed  Judaism  in  Germany. 
"The  healthy  portion,"  he  wrote,1  "even  if  numerically  small,  will 
develop  in  time  in  its  solidity  and  its  harmony  with  the  age ;  while 
the  sickly  and  unsound  portion  will  be  swept  away  by  the  waves  of 
the  new  era." 

In  his  demands  for  reform  Geiger  went  further  than  his  immediate 
associates.  It  was  his  purpose  to  effect  a  distinct  demarcation  between 
orthodoxy  and  reform.  "The  division  between  the  two  unlike  parts 
must  occur ;  and  then,  only  then,  can  a  new  life  be  fostered  by  those 
susceptible  of  reform." 3  All  observances  to  which  reason  entertained 
the  slightest  objection  were  to  be  abrogated.  In  the  prayer-book 
which  he  edited  in  1854,  all  prayers  referring  to  certain  customs,  as 
the  priestly  blessings,  the  counting  of  the  days  between  Passover  and 
Pentecost,  the  blowing  of  the  trumpet  on  New  Year's  Day,  the  shak- 
ing of  the  palm  on  Tabernacles,  etc.,  were  abolished.  In  order  that 
his  sincerity  should  not  be  doubted,  and  lest  he  should  be  charged 
with  advocating  a  religion  of  convenience,  he  himself  scrupulously 
observed  every  precept  of  traditional  Talmudism. 

Geiger' s  first  attempt  at  composition  was  characteristic;  and  it 
shows  how  he  made  use  of  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew  literature  to 
light  up  general  Oriental  themes.  Toward  the  end  of  Geiger' s  uni- 
versity career,  a  prize  was  offered  by  the  University  of  Bonn  for  the 
best  thesis  on  the  relation  between  Judaism  and  Mohammedanism. 
Geiger' s  thesis  on  this  subject  was  the  prize  essay,  and  was  published 
in  1833  under  the  title,  "Was  hat  Mohammed  aus  dem  Judenthum 
aufgenommen?  " s     This  essay  brought  its  author  fame,  and,  notwith- 

1  Letter  to  Jacob  Auerbach,  April  18,  1842.  Nachgelassene  Schrtften,  v.  161. 
Cited  in  E.  Schreiber,  Abraham  Geiger,  1892,  p.  61. 

2  Nachgelassene  Schriften,  v.,  letter  67,  written  to  Wechsler  in  1849. 

8 Translated  into  English  by  "a  member  of  the  Ladies'  League  in  aid  of  the 
Delhi  Mission,"  London,  1899. 


54 

standing  the  contributions  since  made  to  the  subject  by  Wellhausen, 
Hirschfeld,  and  Grimme,  it  still  remains  the  standard  work.  The 
reputation  acquired  by  this  book  was  enhanced  by  the  publication  of 
a  collection  of  unprinted  manuscripts,  "Melo  Hofnayyim" '  (Two 
Handfuls),  in  Hebrew  and  German,  Berlin,  1840,  which  was  followed 
by  the  "  Lehr-  und  Lesebuch  zur  Sprache  der  Mischna "  (Breslau, 
1845),  of  which  the  first  part  was  a  grammar,  the  second  a  reader 
and  vocabulary.  Much  time  had  always  been  spent  in  making 
the  Jewish  youths  acquainted  with  the  difficulties  of  the  Mishnaic 
language,  but  too  little  had  been  devoted  to  a  systematic  instruction 
in  the  development  of  the  Bible  Hebrew  into  the  Hebrew  of  the 
Mishnah;  so  that  the  intricacies  of  this  language  proved  too  difficult 
for  the  student,  or  could  be  mastered  only  after  repeated  failures. 
Geiger's  "Lehr-  und  Lesebuch "  was  the  first  attempt  in  the  German 
language  to  introduce  modern  methods  into  the  grammatical  study  of 
the  Mishnah.  By  it  many  of  the  difficulties  that  the  beginner  en- 
countered in  his  study  of  the  Mishnah  were  simplified. 

In  1853  Michael  Zachs,  then  editor  of  the  "Kerem  Hemed,"  asked 
Geiger  to  contribute  to  his  periodical.  In  response  Geiger  wrote  an 
article  entitled  "Sheminit," 2  which  was  revised  and  published  in 
the  "  Parshandata "  (1855-57),  a  treatise  also  partly  in  German, 
partly  in  Hebrew.  The  Hebrew  portion  is  an  edition  of  critical  notes 
on  Job  by  Saadia  Gaon,  quoted  by  the  French  exegetes  in  their  com- 
mentaries, and  of  unpublished  fragments  of  exegetical  manuscripts 
found  by  Geiger  in  the  Munich  library ;  and  the  German  is  a  succinct 
account  of  the  work  of  the  northern  French  school  of  exegetes. 

The  wide  scholarship  of  Geiger  is  manifested  in  the  variety  of  his 
works  and  in  his  ability  to  turn  from  one  subject  to  another.  From 
Islam  he  passed  to  the  Mishnah ;  from  the  Mishnah  to  the  exegetes ; 
and  from  the  exegetes  to  the  poets;  for.  in  1851  he  translated  some  of 
the  poems  of  Judah  ha-Levi  (b.  1085),  to  which  were  added  notes  and 
a  biography,3  the  whole  serving  as  a  fitting  introduction  to  the  great 

1  Containing  a  letter  of  Del  Medigo  to  Serah  ben  Nathan ;  an  introduction 
to  the  Tahkemoni ;  an  astrological  commentary  of  the  Sefer  Yezira  by  Sabbatai 
Donolo  ;  a  responsum  of  Rashi  on  Jeremiah  ;  five  responsa  of  Maimonides,  etc. 
The  German  portion  is  to  be  found  in  Gesammelte  Schriften,  iii.  1-96,  treating  on 
Candia  and  the  life  of  Joseph  del  Medigo. 

2  Kerem  Hemed,  1853,  pp.  41  et  seq. 

3 Published  also  in  Nachgelassene  Schriften,  iii.  97-178. 


55 

Castilian  Jewish  poet.  In  1856  *  he  published  "Zizim  u-Ferahimw 
("Judisehe  Dichtungen  der  spanischen  und  italienischen  Schule "), 
which  contains  a  brief  account  of  the  greatest  Jewish  poets  of  Spain 
and  Italy,  with  examples  of  their  poems.3  The  last  of  this  series  of 
Geiger's  was  "Solomon  Gabirol  und  seine  Dichtungen  "  (1867).  In 
these  three  works  he  brought  home  to  the  Jews  the  value  of  their 
great  poets  of  the  Middle  Ages.  By  translating  their  poems,  many 
of  which  are  done  into  excellent  German,  he  has  interpreted  the  pas- 
sions and  the  thoughts  that  aroused  the  Hebrew  poet. 

From  the  poets  Geiger  passed  to  his  most  important  work,  the 
critical  study  of  Judaism.  One  part  of  this  study  treats  of  the  Bible 
and  is  represented  by  the  "  Urschrif t  und  Uebersetzungen  der  Bibel  in 
ihrer  Abhangigkeit  von  der  inneren  Entwickelung  des  Judenthums  * 
(1857);  the  second  part,  "Die  Sadducaer  und  Pharisaer"  (1863), 
deals  with  the  history  of  these  sects ;  and  the  third,  "  Das  Judenthum 
und  seine  Geschichte  "  (3  vols.,  1865-71),  treats  of  the  general  devel- 
opment of  Judaism. 

The  "  Urschrift "  embodies  the  results  of  a  critical  study  of  the 
Bible  during  a  period  of  nearly  twenty-five  years.3  Extensive  Bibli- 
cal research  had  been  conducted  by  Christians  and  had  been  developed 
into  what  is  now  commonly  styled  the  "higher  criticism."  It  is  be- 
yond the  province  of  the  present  thesis  to  criticize  the  labors  of  such 
Christian  students  as  Eichhorn,  De  Wette,  Gesenius,  Vater,  von  Boh- 
len,  Michaelis,  Rosenmuller,  and  a  host  of  others  who  lived  and  wrote 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  in  the  first  half  of  the 
nineteenth.  In  many  respects  their  work  is  entitled  to  generous 
praise.  They  effected  a  more  rational  criticism  of  the  Bible,  and 
exercised,  even  in  certain  sections  of  Judaism,  considerable  influence. 
But  it  must  be  said  of  .them  generally  that,  having  been  born  outside 
the  pale  of  Judaism,  they  were  not  able  to  make  use  of  Jewish  tradi- 

1  About  the  same  time,  Geiger  was  also  studying  the  Jewish  grammarians. 
In  1856-57  appeared  the  biographies  of  Joseph  Kimhi  (Ozar  Nehmad,  i.  977 ;  ii. 
98)  and  of  his  sons,  David  (ibid.,  ii.  157)  and  Moses  (ibid.,  ii.  17).  These  biogra- 
phies were  republished  by  R.  Kirchheim  (Frankfort-on-the-Main,  1877)  in  the 
Hebrew  part  of  vol.  v.  of  Geiger's  Nachgelassene  Schrijten.  Geiger  was  the  first 
to  treat  of  the  Kimhis,  to  give  the  meager  details  of  their  lives  as  they  have  come 
down  to  us,  and  to  indicate  the  importance  and  influence  of  their  works. 

8  In  Hebrew  and  German.  The  German  portion  will  be  found  in  the  Nachge- 
lassene Schriften,  iii.  224  et  seq. 

3  Preface  to  the  Urschrift,  v. 


56 

tion,  nor  could  they  control  Jewish  sources.  Among  Jews,  however, 
there  was  always  some  hesitancy  in  criticizing  the  Bible ;  the  Scrip- 
tures being  regarded  by  them  as  spiritual  food,  too  sacred  to  be  handled 
except  with  veneration.  Krochmal,  Luzzatto,  and  Rapoport  were 
reluctant  to  criticize  the  Bible ;  and  Zunz  never  went  deeply  into 
Biblical  investigation.  Geiger  was  the  first  Jew  of  the  modern  school 
of  research  to  cast  aside  all  timidity  and  to  approach  to  the  higher 
criticism.  In  at  least  one  respect  Geiger' s  work  is  superior  to  that 
of  Christian  students :  he  was  able  to  make  use  of  Jewish  sources ;  and 
he  employed  them  to  the  fullest  extent. 

In  the  "  Urschrift "  Geiger  attempts  to  ascertain  what  was  the 
original  text  of  the  Scriptures,  what  was  the  condition  of  the  Jews 
at  the  time  of  its  compilation,  and  what  was  the  relation  of  the  versions 
to  the  original  text.  In  this  work  the  skepticism  that  had  mani- 
fested itself  in  his  early  years  broke  forth  anew  in  all  its  strength. 

The  "Urschrift "  was  certainly  an  epoch-making  work.  Geiger' s 
criticism  is  ingenious;  and  his  translations  and  combinations  are 
exceedingly  happy.  His  work  has  dominated  Jewish  thought  to  such 
an  extent  that  it  has  fully  justified  the  author's  forecast:  "If  its  [the 
"  Urschrift' s  "]  theories  are  established,  then  it  has  opened  a  new  and 
secure  road  to  the  determination  and  the  correct  understanding  of  the 
Bible." '  So  thoroughgoing  were  Geiger' s  ideas  on  reform,  and  so  in- 
cisive his  criticism,  that  on  the  twentieth  anniversary  of  his  rabbinate 
the  orthodox  Luzzatto  wrote :  "  May  God  in  his  goodness  bless  Abra- 
ham; may  he  crown  his  endeavors  in  behalf  of  science;  and  may  he 
grant  him  long  life  to  make  good  what  he  has  destroyed. " 3 

Having  dealt  fully  with  the  Biblical  material,  Geiger  next  took 
up  the  study  of  a  period  of  Jewish  history  that  has  had  an  important 
influence  on  the  development  of  Judaism  and  that  had  always  been 
obscure ;  namely,  that  of  the  conflicts  between  the  Pharisees  and  the 
Sadducees.  This  had  been  treated  to  some  extent  in  the  "Urschrift." 
Geiger  gives  a  vivid  portrayal  of  the  contests ;  and  his  style  is  clear 
and  vigorous. 

The  most  popular  of  Geiger' s  writings  is  his  series  of  lectures  on 
"Das  Judenthum  und  seine  Geschichte." 3    This  is  not  an  exhaustive 

1lbid.,  p.  l. 

2  Luzzatto,  Autobiography,  translated  by  M.  GrUnwald,  p.  134. 

3  In  three  parts :  the  first  has  been  rendered  into  English  by  Maurice 
Mayer,  New  York,  1886. 


57 

history  of  Judaism,  but  an  outline  of  it;  and  it  is  characterized  by 
the  freedom  and  originality  with  which  Geiger  handled  all  his  sub- 
jects. Originally,  the  lectures  were  not  written  with  the  view  of 
being  printed,  but  were  intended  for  oral  delivery,  and  to  be,  as  he 
says  in  the  preface,  an  honest  presentation  of  the  author's  views;  not 
for  the  purpose  of  insidiously  opposing  generally  adopted  opinions, 
but  as  the  outgrowth  of  a  desire  to  authenticate  his  convictions. 
Geiger  defines  Judah  not  merely  as  a  people,  but  as  the  depositary 
of  an  idea ;  and  he  traces  the  development  of  this  idea  from  its  be- 
ginning. 

In  dealing  with  the  origin  of  Christianity,  he  shows,  more  than 
in  any  other  of  his  works,  his  characteristic  boldness.  His  philo- 
sophic and  poetic  interpretation  of  the  "  logos  "  and  *  the  only  begot- 
ten Son  of  God  "  is  clever,  but  daring  as  coming  from  a  Jew.  He 
knew  that  with  zealots  his  views  would  have  no  weight,  and  was 
ready  to  receive  their  abuse.  He  even  exulted  in  the  thought  that 
such  abuse  might  be  directed  against  him,  yet  at  the  same  time  he 
feared  that  the  expression  of  his  views  might  cause  harm  to  the 
Jews.1  "I  alone  and  exclusively  bear  the  responsibility  of  all  I  have 
said  in  the  following  lectures ;  how  many  or  how  few  of  my  co-relig- 
ionists share  or  approve  my  views,  I  know  not.  Hence  I  make  ex- 
clusive claim  to  the  entire  honor  of  being  attacked.  My  words  must 
not  afford  a  pretext  for  an  accusation  against  Jews  and  Judaism."3 

After  Geiger' s  death  five  volumes  of  "  Nachgelassene  Schriften" 
were  published  by  his  son  Ludwig,  himself  a  student  of  Jewish  his- 
tory, especially  in  Germany. 

To  understand  the  influence  of  Geiger  it  must  be  remembered 
that  he  was  pre-eminently  a  theologian  in  the  modern  sense  of  the 
term.  In  his  capacity  as  docent  at  the  Hochschule,  opportunity  was 
given  him  to  disseminate  his  views  through  the  Eeform  rabbis,  who 
went  thence  to  all  parts  of  Europe  and  America.  The  theologian  in 
him  dominated  the  student  and  the  critic,  so  that  his  theology  can 
in  no  wise  be  separated  from  his  works.  His  critical  studies  were 
written  with  the  view  not  only  of  offering  scientific  hypotheses,  but 
of  fixing  a  standard  of  conduct  for  Israel.     In  this  he  differed  from 

■  • 

1  Part  I. ,  lecture  ix. 

2 Das  Judenthum  und  seine  Geschickte,  p.  xii.  ;  English  translation  by 
Mayer,  p.  vii. 


58 

Zunz.  Both  were  liberal  critics ;  both  scrupulously  observed  the  pre- 
cepts of  tradition,  though  from  different  motives;  both  sought  to 
develop  the  esthetic  side  of  Jewish  life.  They  differed  in  the  method 
pursued  and  in  the  extent  of  their  criticism.  Zunz,  however  much 
he  doubted  the  validity  of  tradition,  rejected  all  reform  whose  object 
was  solely  to  break  away  from  it.  He  regarded  the  time  as  not  yet 
ripe  for  the  abrogation  of  tradition.  Let  Israel  be  educated  in  the 
truths  of  Judaism,  and  its  inner  development  will  in  time  cast  off  the 
unnecessary.  Let  the  advance  be  slow,  so  that  there  be  no  rupture 
within  Israel;  for  history  has  shown  how  injurious  to  any  cause 
division  is.     The  future  is  more  important  than  the  present. 

Geiger  took  an  opposite  course ;  for  he  was  a  man  of  action.  The 
objectionable  must  be  weeded  out  of  the  daily  practise.  At  all  haz- 
ards, schism  must  be  brought  about.  Thus,  Zunz  and  Geiger  are 
two  different  types  of  the  same  school.  One  was  the  Conservative, 
the  other  the  extreme  Radical,  of  the  German  school  of  critics. 


CHAPTEE   VIII 

ZACHARIAS   FRANKEL 

Having  considered  two  branches  of  the  German  school — the 
Conservative,  of  which  Zunz  was  representative,  and  the  Kadical,  of 
which  Geiger  was  typical — we  now  come  to  a  third  branch,  known, 
in  contradistinction  to  the  Reform  party,  as  the  "  orthodox  historical " 
school.  The  members  of  this  school  were  not  affiliated  with  the 
ultra-orthodox  party,  which  opposed  all  critical  investigation  and 
which  was  represented  by  Samson  Raphael  Hirsch.  They  joined  with 
Zunz  and  Geiger  only  in  their  support  of  the  renaissance  of  Jewish 
historical  studies. 

The  leader  of  this  division  was  Zacharias  Frankel,  born  in  Prague, 
October  18,  1801;  died  in  Breslau,  February  13,  1875.  Like  all 
orthodox  boys,  he  was  instructed  in  Bible  and  Talmud ;  and  for  sec- 
ular studies  he  went  to  the  University  at  Pest.  In  1832  he  was 
chosen  rabbi  of  the  "  Leitmeritzer  Kreis,"  and  four  years  later  was 
called  to  Dresden  as  chief  rabbi.  From  this  time  Frankel' s  was  one 
of  the  most  celebrated  of  Jewish  names  throughout  Germany ;  for  all 
his  work  was  centered  in  the  desire  to  do  service  to  his  people.     He 


59 

directed  his  attention  to  what  was  one  of  the  greatest  impediments  to 
emancipation.  Of  the  many  distinctions  continually  being  made  in 
daily  life  between  Jew  and  Christian  none  was  so  humiliating  as  the 
special  oath  administered  to  Jews  before  giving  testimony  in  court.1 
In  1840  Frankel  laid  before  the  Diet  of  Saxony  an  article  entitled 
"Die  Eidesleistung  der  Juden  "  (Dresden  and  Leipsic,  1840).  This, 
together  with  a  similar  article,  "Der  gerichtliche  Beweis  nach  mo- 
saisch-talmudischen  Rechte "  (Berlin,  1847),  placed  before  the  Prus- 
sian Diet  of  1847,  resulted  in  the  abolition  of  the  oath  throughout 
Germany. 

During  his  early  years  Frankel  devoted  a  great  deal  of  energy  to 
bringing  about  the  recognition  of  the  Jewish  religion  on  the  part  of 
the  state.  The  abolition  of  the  oath  was  one  great  step  toward  this 
recognition,  and  had  Frankel  done  nothing  else,  his  name  would  for 
this  alone  have  been  cherished  in  Israel.  Frankel  saw,  however, 
that  what  the  Jews  needed  was  not  so  much  the  repeal  of  hostile  leg- 
islation, and  the  increase  of  rights  and  privileges,  as  a  reform  within 
their  own  body — a  spiritual  and  intellectual  regeneration.  This 
reform,  he  believed,  had  to  commence  with  the  leaders  themselves. 
There  was  too  little  harmony  among  them  as  to  the  fundamental  doc- 
trines upon  which  modern  Judaism  was  built.  The  only  means  of 
securing  such  harmony  lay  in  the  organization  of  some  central  body 
and  the  establishment  of  a  theological  seminary  in  which  should  be 
given  methodical  instruction  in  Jewish  theology  and  literature. 

This  need  was  felt  by  others  besides  Frankel.  Geiger  was  work- 
ing for  the  same  end,  but,  for  a  time,  could  interest  but  few  in  his 
project  because  those  interested  in  the  founding  of  a  Jewish  seminary 
doubted  the  expediency  of  having  at  its  head  a  man  with  such  thor- 
ough Reform  principles.  The  propositions  of  Frankel  met  with  a 
more  immediate  success.  In  1854,  owing  to  the  good  offices  of 
Jonas  Frankel,  a  seminary  was  founded  in  Breslau  to  which  Zacharias 
Frankel  was  called  as  director,  and  Heinrich  Graetz  and  Jacob  Bernays 
as  assistants.  As  head  of  this  rabbinical  seminary,  Frankel' s  posi- 
tion was  one  of  great  importance  not  only  in  Breslau,  but  throughout 
Germany ;  for  the  only  Jewish  seminary  then  in  existence  was  the 
one  in  Padua,  founded  in  1829.     From  Breslau  went  forth  rabbis  and 


1  On  the  literature  concerning  the  "Moreh  Judaico" 
Zeitschrift  fur  hebrdische  Bibliographie,  i.  17  et  aeq. 


see  Steinschneider  in 


60 

teachers  to  all  parts  of  the  world,  wherever  Jews  were  congregated; 
and  with  them  went  the  doctrines  that  Frankel  had  impressed  upon 
them.  In  order  to  propagate  his  views  and  to  arouse  interest  in  his 
party,  Frankel  edited  the  "  Zeitschrift  fur  die  religiosen  InteresseD  des 
Judenthums"  (Breslau,  1844-46)  and  the  "  Monatsschrift  fur  Ge- 
schichte  und  Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums"  (1851-1867),  in  both 
of  which  he  wrote  numerous  articles. 

Frankel  was  one  of  the  greatest  Talmudic  authorities  of  his  day. 
For  him,  the  basis  of  Judaism  was  the  Bible ;  and  without  the  Torah 
Israel  could  not  exist.  Eapoport,  another  great  Talmudist,  though 
timid  in  Biblical  criticism,  did  not  hesitate  to  criticize  the  text  of  the 
Bible.  Frankel  objected  not  only  to  any  change  in  the  text,  but  also 
to  any  criticism  that  might  lead  to  such  a  change.  He  was  not  in 
sympathy  with  the  Rabbinism  of  the  Middle  Ages.  He  recognized 
that  reform  in  certain  things  was  necessary,  and  was  willing  to  allow 
it  a  certain  leeway.  For  this  reason  he  attended  the  second  confer- 
ence of  Eeform  rabbis,  held  at  Frankfort  in  1845.  The  extreme 
radicalism  displayed  there,  however,  forced  him  to  retire;  and  he 
resolved  never  to  attend  these  conferences  again. 

The  life-work  of  Frankel  was  a  scientific  investigation  of  the  Tal- 
mud and  of  the  Halakah.  Throughout  the  Middle  Ages  the  Talmud — 
then  the  basis  of  all  Jewish  education — was  more  or  less  critically 
studied.  Numerous  commentaries  had  been  composed,  some  lexicons 
had  been  written,  and,  since  1606,  the  Mishnah  had  been  translated 
into  Latin,  Spanish,  and  German.  Of  the  modern  school  of  critics, 
Krochmal,  Eapoport,  Luzzatto,  Geiger,  and  others  had  studied  single 
phases  of  the  Talmud ;  but  they  had  not  exhausted  the  subject.  A 
comprehensive  introduction  to  the  Talmud  and  the  halakic  literature, 
according  to  the  methods  of  the  modern  Jewish  school  of  criticism, 
was  still  a  desideratum.  To  supply  this  need  was  Frankel' s  endeavor. 
He  sought  to  trace  the  development  of  the  Halakah  by  a  study  of 
the  Septuagint,  the  Mishnah,  the  Jerusalem  Talmud,1  and  the  Ee- 
sponsa  literature. 

Frankel' s  Talmudic  studies  led  him  to  a  careful  survey  of  the 
Septuagint.     He  felt  that  with  the  close  of  prophecy  in  Israel  the 

1  Frankel  had  hoped  to  publish  an  introduction  to  the  Babylonian  Talmud, 
but  it  never  appeared.  Preliminary  studies  of  this  subject,  however,  he  pub- 
lished in  the  Monatsschrift,  1861,  x.  186,  206,  258,  under  the  title  Beitrage  zu  einer 
Minleitung  in  den  Talmud. 


61 

creative  power  of  Judaism  had  not  ceased.  The  prophet  had  but 
yielded  place  to  the  teacher.  "  There  was  no  longer  any  need  of  dis- 
suading the  people  from  idolatry.  Complete  subservience  to  God  and 
His  law  had  filled  the  hearts  of  all  Jews.  This  law,  which  was  re- 
garded as  the  noblest  inheritance,  had  caused  a  new  demand ;  namely, 
acquaintance  with  that  law  and  instruction  as  to  its  execution  .  .  . 
The  time  needed  teachers,  not  prophets." ! 

The  divine  commands  (Halakah)  were  carefully  reviewed  in  order 
that  the  daily  life  of  the  people  might  be  regulated  in  accordance 
with  them.  This  activity  resulted  in  the  science  of  the  Jewish 
religion.2  Data  of  its  origins  in  Palestine  are  lacking.  In  Alexan- 
dria, where  there  was  a  large  Jewish  colony,  a  greater  religious 
activity  and  hermeneutic  literature  existed  earlier  than  in  Palestine. 
Of  this  literature  the  Septuagint  was,  as  far  as  is  known,  the  first  pro- 
duction, and  is,  therefore,  of  the  utmost  importance  for  the  study  of 
the  Bible.  The  greatest  ignorance  existed  even  as  to  the  origin  and 
the  purpose  of  the  Septuagint  and  its  relation  to  the  written  and  oral 
law.  In  three  works,  "  Yorstudien  zu  der  Septuaginta "  (Leipsic, 
1841),  "  Ueber  den  Einfluss  des  paMstinensischen  Exegese  auf  die  alex- 
andrinische  Hermeneutik "  (Leipsic,  1851),  and  "Ueber  palastinische 
und  alexandrinische  Schriftforschung  "  (Breslau,  1854),  Frankel  dis- 
cussed the  question  of  the  Septuagint  more  exhaustively  than  it  had 
ever  been  treated  before. 

These  three  works  may  be  regarded  as  the  preliminary  investiga- 
tions in  his  study  of  the  Halakah ;  for  the  author  was  certain  that 
there  was  a  very  close  affinity  between  "Alexandrian  hermeneutics," 
of  which  the  Septuagint  was  the  representative,  and  the  "  Palestinian 
exegesis  "  which  developed  into  the  Midrash  and  the  Talmud.  This 
connection  had  frequently  been  overlooked.  He  was  also  certain  that 
the  spirit  that  led  to  the  compilation  of  the  Talmud  was  to  be  found 
in  the  early  versions,  in  Philo,  and  in  Josephus.  In  other  words,  he 
showed  conclusively  that  "those  writings  which  had  served  as  the 
basis  for  Christianity  contained. Talmudic  elements."  After  his  study 
of  the  Alexandrian  hermeneutics  he  turned  to  the  study  of  the 
Kesponsa  literature,  and  published  his  "Entwurf  eine  Geschichte  der 
Literatur  der  nachtalmudischen  Kesponsa."     The  Eesponsa  literature 

1  Frankel,  Ueber  den  Einfluss  der  palitstinensischen  Exegese  auf  die  alexandrin- 
ische Hermeneutik,  p.  1,  Leipsic,  1851.  *lbid.,  p.  2. 


62 

originated  in  the  seventh  century  (soon  after  the  close  of  the  Talmud) 
and  extends  to  the  present  day.  "No  field  of  human  activity  and 
human  science  was  untouched  by  it."  ■  These  responsa,  which  are 
answers  to  questions  addressed  to  the  most  noted  men  of  every  age, 
were  the  authorities  for  conduct.  They  are  the  continuation  of  the 
same  spirit  in  Judaism  that  produced  the  early  versions  of  the  Bible, 
the  Mishnah,  and  the  Gemara.  They  explain  difficult  passages  in  the 
Talmud,  and  throw  much  light  on  its  text  as  well  as  on  the  history  of 
Jewish  culture ;  interpreting  the  momentous  questions  of  philosophy, 
religion,  mathematics,  and  chronology  of  every  age.  Owing  to  the  lack 
of  proper  histories,  these  responsa,  which  depict  the  conditions  of 
many  Jewish  communities,  must  be  used  by  the  historian.  There 
were  myriads  of  them,  but  large  numbers  have  been  lost.  The  names 
of  some  of  them,  however,  have  been  preserved  in  references  in  other 
books.  Frankel  in  his  "  Entwurf "  gives  a  historical  sketch  of  these 
responsa,  which,  though  not  exhaustive,  was  at  least  the  first  of 
its  kind,  and  treats  of  the  times  in  which  they  were  called  forth, 
of  their  authors,  of  the  language  in  which  they  were  written,  and  of 
their  authenticity. 

From  the  Kesponsa  literature  Frankel  turned  to  his  most  important 
productions,  studies  in  the  Talmud,  which  resulted  in  the  publication 
of  three  separate  works :  (a)  An  introduction  to  the  Jerusalem  Tal- 
mud (Treatise  in  Hebrew  in  five  parts,  Breslau,  1870),  treating  of  the 
conditions  of  the  Jews  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  the  compilation  of 
the  Talmud,  the  colloquial  language  of  the  Jews  of  that  period,  the 
Halakah  and  Haggadah,  the  chronology  of  the  Amoraim  (sages  of 
the  Gemara)  and  their  methods,  and  of  the  commentaries  to  the  Jer- 
usalem Talmud ;  (b)  an  edition  of  parts  of  the  Jerusalem  Talmud ; a 
and  (c)  "Darke  ha-Mishnah"  (Hodegetica  in  Mishnam  librosque  cum 
ea  conjunctos,  Leipsic,  1859). 

This  last  work  was  the  production  for  which  Frankel  was  most 
vigorously  attacked.  It  is  also  in  five  parts,  and  treats  of  the  history 
of  the  Mishnah;  its  origin  and  development;  of  the  chronology  of 
the  Tannaim  (sages  of  the  Mishnah)  and  of  the  religious  and  philo- 
sophic problems  with  which  they  had  to  deal ;  of  the  schools  of  Hillel 

1  Introduction  to  the  Entwurf. 

2  Frankel  had  hoped  to  edit  the  entire  Talmud,  but  only  two  parte  appeared  : 
toI.  i.,  Berakot  and  Pesahim,  Vienna,  1874;  vol.  ii.,  Demai,  Breslau,  1875. 


63 

and  Shammai,  of  the  compilation  of  the  Mishnah  and  its  arrange- 
ment into  subdivisions;  of  the  principles  and  rules  of  the  Mishnah. 
It  critically  surveys  the  Mishnaic  literature;  i.e.,  such  works  as  the 
"Mekilta,"  "Tosefta,"  etc.,  and  the  commentaries  on  the  Mishnah. 
The  part  most  seriously  objected  to  was  Franker  s  explanation  of  the 
oral  law,  which,  together  with  the  written  law,  tradition  claimed  was 
given  to  Moses  on  Sinai. 

This  oral  law  was  part  of  the  lex  gentium,  which  was  not  incor- 
porated into  the  Scriptures,  but  was  collected  and  found  a  resting- 
place  in  the  Mishnah  and  Gemara.  According  to  Frankel,  the  phrase 
"Halakot  le-Mosheh  mi-Sinai"  (Laws  Given  to  Moses  on  Sinai) 
must  not  be  taken  literally.  By  it  were  meant  those  precepts  which 
were  observed  from  time  immemorial,  whose  origin  none  knew,  but 
whose  formulation  may  have  dated  from  the  discussions  in  the  Great 
Synagogue.  Because  they  were  ancient,  these  Halakot  were  held  as 
sacred  as  if  they  had  been  given  to  Moses  on  Sinai.  For  holding 
this  view  Frankel  was  rated  as  a  blasphemer  and  an  infidel,  and  was 
especially  attacked  by  Samson  Kaphael  Hirsch.  Rapoport,  in  a  pam- 
phlet, "Dibre  Shalom  we-Emet,"  came  to  Frankel's  assistance,  and 
showed  that  this  view  was  entirely  in  accord  with  orthodox  principles. 

In  summing  up  Frankel's  work  it  will  be  seen  that  his  importance 
lies  in  his  having  brought  into  existence  the  orthodox  historical 
school.  He  presented  an  introduction  to  the  Jerusalem  Talmud,  to 
the  Mishnah,  and  to  the  study  of  the  Halakah,  based  upon  modern 
methods  of  criticism.  He  showed  that  Talmudic  tradition  was  un- 
broken, and  that  the  same  spirit  that  permeated  the  Bible  may  be 
traced  in  the  Greek  versions,  in  the  works  of  Philo  and  Josephus,  in 
the  Talmud,  and  throughout  the  Responsa  literature.  As  Zunz  was 
greatest  among  those  who  treated  of  Haggadah,  so,  of  all  this  modern 
school  of  critics,  was  Frankel  greatest  among  those  whose  attention 
was  claimed  by  the  Halakah. 

CHAPTER   IX 

ISAAC  MARCUS  JOST 

Of  the  entire  historical  school,  the  works  of  the  historian  Isaac 
Marcus  Jost  were,  perhaps,  the  most  severely  criticized.  However 
just  such  criticism  may  be,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  Jost  is  most 


64 

completely  allied  with  the  resurrection  of  Jewish  historical  research 
in  Germany. 

Jost  was  born  February  22,  1793,  at  Bernberg,  Germany,  and 
died  November  20,  1860,  in  Frankfort-on-the-Main.  Circumstances 
compelled  him  at  a  very  early  age  to  help  maintain  the  family.1  His 
first  instruction  he  received  in  the  Hebrew  school  at  Bernberg,  but 
on  the  death  of  his  father,  in  1803,  he  was  sent  to  the  Samson  Free 
School,  where  he  met  Leopold  Zunz.  In  1811  he  entered  the  Bruns- 
wick gymnasium,  from  which  in  1813  he  went  to  Gottingen,  where 
he  studied  history,  philology,  theology,  and  philosophy.  While  at 
Gottingen  Jost  made  the  acquaintance  of  Israel  Jacobson,  a  wealthy 
banker,  who  was  attracted  by  the  extent  of  Jost's  capabilities.  With 
him  Jost  went  to  Berlin,  and  through  his  kind  assistance  was  enabled 
to  be  graduated  from  the  University  of  Berlin. 

Despite  the  requests  and  offers  of  Jacobson,  Jost  would  not  enter 
the  ministry.  After  his  graduation,  he  became  an  educator,  first  in 
Berlin — where  he  founded  a  school  open  to  Jews  and  Christians  alike 
— and  later,  from  1835  till  his  death,  in  Frankfort,  where  he  was 
head  master  of  the  Jewish  school. 

When  at  the  Samson  institution,  both  Jost  and  Zunz  had  deter- 
mined to  write  a  history  of  the  Jews ;  and  they  were  continually  col- 
lecting material  for  it.  Zunz  doubted  the  advisability  of  writing  a 
history  till  its  elementary  studies  had  been  completed,  and  sufficient 
data  for  an  authentic  history  were  forthcoming.  This  was  character- 
istic of  Zunz.  He  was  no  doubt  right  in  his  unwillingness  to  endan- 
ger his  reputation  by  writing  a  work  which,  because  of  the  absence 
of  material,  would  be  trustworthy  only  to  a  limited  extent.  Jost  also 
must  have  felt  the  force  of  this  objection ;  but  he  also  saw  the  need 
of  a  history  in  German. 

While  Zunz  hesitated  and  was  engaged  in  special  studies  of  Jew- 
ish history,  Jost  was  working  under  great  difficulties  toward  the  com- 
pletion of  his  task — the  composition  of  a  comprehensive  history  of  the 
Jews.2 

At  all  times,  a  history  of  the  Jews  is  a  most  difficult  subject  to 

1  Zirndorf,  M.  Jost  und  seine  Freunde,  p.  94,  Cincinnati,  1886. 

2  For  the  purpose  of  encouraging  historical  research  he  founded  and  edited 
the  Israelitische  Annalen  (1839-41).  He  also  edited  in  connection  with  Michael 
Creizenach  the  Hebrew  periodical  Zion  (1840-41),  in  order  to  arouse  interest  in 
the  Hebrew  language. 


65 

compass ;  its  extent  is  so  great  that  very  few  men  can  do  justice  to 
such  vast  material,  even  when  the  necessary  authentic  data  are  at 
hand.  And  a  history  of  the  Jews  includes  not  only  a  history  of  the 
national  existence  of  Israel,  but  also  a  study  of  the  influences  under 
which  Judaism  developed. 

With  the  Diaspora  a  new  life  began  for  Judaism,  and  the  Jews 
were  scattered  over  the  world.  In  Asia,  Africa,  Europe,  and  later  in 
America,  individual  communities  developed  their  own  history.  These 
communities  were  united  by  a  common  danger  and  by  the  possession 
of  like  moral  codes  and  religious  traditions.  The  sum  of  the  histories 
of  these  infinite  numbers  of  communities  forms  a  complete  history  of 
Judaism.  The  historian  of  the  Jews  must  therefore  not  only  be  able 
to  control  the  incidents  of  any  and  all  of  these  sections  in  any  given 
time,  but  he  must  also  be  intimately  acquainted  with  the  history  of 
civilization  in  general  and  with  the  literary,  political,  social,  and 
economic  history  of  all  the  people  in  the  midst  of  whom  the  Jews 
have  dwelt.  If  the  task  be  so  difficult  with  the  required  material  at 
hand,  how  much  more  arduous  was  it  for  Jost  when  knowledge  was 
meager  and  records  were  faulty. 

Before  Jost  but  two  noteworthy  attempts  at  a  history  had  been 
made,  and  both  of  these  were  by  Christians.  The  first  was '  by  a  Prot- 
estant clergyman  named  Jacob  Basnage  (1653-1723) ;  the  second a  by 
Hannah  Adams,  wife  of  a  Boston  clergyman.  Basnage's  History, 
the  standard  work  in  Christian  and  in  some  Jewish  circles  before 
Jost's  work  appeared,  was  fragmentary.  Of  it  Graetzsays:8  "De- 
spite his  [ Basnage' s]  efforts  to  be  impartial  and  honest,  he  could  not 
rid  himself  of  the  belief  that  the  '  Jews  are  rejected  because  they 
have  rejected  Jesus.'  Basnage's  '  History  of  the  Jews '  has  numerous 
faults.  Hardly  a  single  sentence  can  be  regarded  as  perfectly  just 
and  in  accordance  with  the  truth." 

The  history  by  Hannah  Adams  was  also  fragmentary  and  very 
imperfect;  for  her  training  in  Jewish  history  did  not  furnish  her 
with  the  knowledge  to  do  justice  to  her  theme.     Her  "crude  work, 

lEistoire  de  la  Religion  des  Juifs  (tepuis  Je'sus  Christ  jusqu'a  present,  pour 
servir  de  supplement  et  de  continuation  a  Vhistoire  de  Joseph.  Five  vols.,  Rotter- 
dam, 1707-1711. 

*  The  History  of  the  Jews  from  the  Destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  the  Present 
Time.    London,  1818. 

3  Geschichte  der  Juden,  x.  317  ;  English  ed.,  v.  97. 

5 


66 

nevertheless,  was  good  enough  for  the  purposes  of  the  London  Society  for 
the  Promotion  of  Christianity  among  the  Jews,  which,  besides,  made 
several  alterations  in  the  book  in  order  to  serve  its  ends.  Fidelity  to 
history  and  truth  were  entirely  disregarded  in  the  changes." 2 

Such  was  the  work  done  before  the  appearance  of  Jost's  "Gesch- 
ichte  der  Israeliten  seit  der  Zeit  der  Maccabaer  bis  auf  unsere  Tage  "  ■ 
(9  vols.  Berlin,  1820-29),  which  was  followed  by  the  "Neuere  Gesch- 
ichte  der  Israeliten  von  1815  bis  1845  "  (3  vols,  ibid.,  1846-47),  and 
Geschichte  des  Judenthums  und  seiner  Sekten "  (3  vols.,  Leipsic, 
1857-59).3         '  f 

Jost's  importance  in  the  historico-critical  school  lies  in  the  fact 
that  he  was  the  first  to  produce  a  comprehensive  history  of  the  Jews 
which  might  be  used  with  some  sense  of  safety  and  which  was  in 
accordance  with  modern  critical  methods.  When  Jost  wrote  his  first 
history,  the  investigations  of  Eapoport,  Zunz,  and  others  had  not  yet 
been  published.  Jost  was,  therefore,  compelled  to  explore ;  as  Stein- 
schneider  said,4  he  had  to  resort  to  unreliable  Christian  sources  which 
were  not  primary.  The  errors  of  his  early  work  are  due  to  the  lack 
of  better  information,  and  represent  the  views  of  the  learned  of  that 
time.  His  later  works,  especially  the  "Geschichte  des  Judenthums 
und  seiner  Sekten,"  which  was  the  first  attempt  to  present  a  history 
of  Judaism,  shows  marked  improvement.  But  even  in  this  work 
many  of  Jost's  bad  methods  are  discernible.  He  frequently  makes 
blunders  which  he  would  never  have  made  had  he  read  his  sources 
more  carefully.  For  these  blunders,  he  was  bitterly  attacked  on  all 
sides.  "I  hate,  I  despise  Jost,"  wrote  Luzzatto,  "and  as  long  as  my 
soul  and  a  pure  heart  are  within  me,  this  abhorrence  shall  not  leave 
me.  I  hate  him  and  ever  will  hate  him,  not  for  his  thoughts,  but  for 
the  words  he  has.  written. " 5  In  addition  to  showing  frequent  per- 
versions of  the  truth,  his  works  are  unmistakably  one-sided.6    Granted, 

xlbid.,  German  ed. ,  xi.  452;  Englished.,  v.  593. 

*  An  abridgment  of  this  work  appeared  1831-32  in  two  volumes  under  the 
title  Allgemeine  Geschichte  des  israelitischen  Yolkes. 

3  A  good  piece  of  work  outside  of  the  historical  field  was  done  by  Jost  in  his 
translation  of  the  Mishnah  into  German  in  Hebrew  characters. 

4  Bibliographisches  Handwbrterbuch  fur  hebrdische  Sprachkunde,  p.  xxxii., 
Leipsic,  1859. 

5  Letter  to  Rapoport,  January  28,  1831 ;  Letters  of  Luzzatto,  Przemysl,  1882, 
p.  178. 

•Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  xi.  455;  English  ed.,  v.  595. 


67 

however,  that  Steinschneider  is  fully  justified  in  saying  !  that  "  in  the 
eyes  of  all  critics  Jost  must  be  regarded  as  a  shameless  plagiarist,  a 
dangerous  inventor,  and  a  literary  perjurer, "  Jost's  influence  in  his- 
torical studies  was  by  no  means  unimportant.  He  was  the  first  Jew 
to  attempt  a  complete  history ;  and  his  influence  was  felt  by  all  his 
successors,  both  Jewish  and  Christian.  His  "Geschichte  der  Juden 
und  seiner  Sekten,"  which  is  his  best  work,  is  still  very  frequently 
used.  It  is  now,  however,  customary  in  a  measure  to  overlook  Jost, 
because  with  advancing  science  more  is  known  than  he  could  know, 
and  because  his  works  were  inferior  in  presentation  and  accuracy  to 
those  of  his  successor,  Heinrich  Graetz.  In  studying  Jost  and  his 
relation  to  the  progress  of  Jewish  knowledge,  we  must  judge  him  not 
by  what  we  now  know,  but  by  the  position  he  held  among  his  con- 
temporaries, and  by  the  influence  his  work  had  upon  them.  Jost's 
work  came  at  the  proper  moment  and  fulfilled  the  need  of  its  time. 
When  compared  with  his  peers,  he  may  not  have  been  a  genius :  nor 
may  he  have  been  able  to  make  their  discoveries.  In  the  light  of 
his  time,  he  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  erudition  and  of  great  talent 
and  resolution.  As  a  pioneer,  his  attempts  must  be  applauded ;  and 
his  works  must  be  classed  among  the  important  and  epoch-making 
volumes  of  his  century. 

CHAPTER   X 

HEINRICH  GRAETZ 

Of  all  Jost's  successors,  the  only  historian  of  the  Jews  who  has 
entirely  supplanted  him  is  Heinrich  Graetz.  Graetz  was  born  October 
31,  1817,  at  Xions,  Posen,  and  died  September  17,  1891,  at  Munich. 
As  a  child  he  gave  no  signs  of  his  future  distinction,  but  seems  to 
have  impressed  most  people  as  being  dull  and  stupid.  His  early 
instruction  he  received  at  the  Heder  or  Hebrew  school,  in  Zerkov, 
whither  his  parents  had  moved  shortly  after  his  birth ;  then  at  Woll- 
stein ;  and  finally  at  Oldenburg,  to  which  place  he  went  hoping  to 
receive  a  scientific  training  in  the  Talmud  from  Samson  Raphael 
Hirsch.  In  1840  he  attended  the  University  of  Berlin,  and  in  1845 
was  graduated  from  the  University  of  Jena  with  the  degree  of  doctor 
of  philosophy,  his  dissertation   being  "De  auctoritate  et  vi  quam 

1  Bibliographisches  Ilandworterbuch,  p.  xxxii. 


68 

gnosis  in  Judaismus  habuerit "  (published  in  1846  under  the  title, 
"  Gnosticismus  und  Judenthum"). 

After  his  graduation  Graetz  met  with  many  disappointments.  As 
a  preacher,  he  was  an  utter  failure;  and  as  a  teacher,  he  changed  his 
positions  frequently  without  improving  his  condition.  At  the  open- 
ing of  the  Breslau  seminary  in  1854  he  was  appointed  a  member  of 
the  staff  of  instructors,  and  in  1870  was  made  professor  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Breslau. 

Graetz  first  attracted  attention  by  a  series  of  articles  published  in 
Fiirst's  "Orient,"  1844-45,  among  which  a  criticism  of  Geiger's 
"  Lehrbuch  zur  Sprache  der  Mischna  "  deserves  special  notice ;  for  it 
was  Graetz' s  first  attack  on  the  Eeform  of  Geiger.  By  this  article, 
the  author  showed  clearly  his  intention  of  championing  that  branch 
of  the  historical  school  headed  by  Zacharias  Frankel.  Graetz' s  doc- 
tor's dissertation  and  his  contributions  to  Frankel' s  "  Zeitschrif t "  1 
and  "  Monatsschrift  " 2  were  favorably  received.  His  greatest  work 
is  his  "Geschichte  der  Juden."  3  The  first  volume  to  appear  was  the 
fourth  of  the  series,  viz.,  "Vom  Untergang  des  judischen  Staates  bis 
zum  Abschluss  des  Talmud"  (1853).  This  together  with  volume 
iii.  (the  second  part  to  be  published),  "Geschichte  der  Juden  von 
dem  Tode  Juda  Maccabis  bis  zum  Untergang  des  judischen  Staates  " 
(1856),  commanded  immediate  approval  and  established  Graetz's  rep- 
utation. These  volumes  are  scholarly,  and  give  evidence  of  pains- 
taking original  research.  They  were  the  most  carefully  elaborated 
parts  of  the  history,  and  shed  much  light  upon  a  period  of  which 
comparatively  little  was  known. 

The  remainder  of  the  History,  vols.  v.  to  xi.,  which  bring  it  down 
to  the  present  day,  is  not  so  good;  for  it  was  written  hurriedly,  per- 
haps because  Graetz  feared  some  one  might  appear  in  the  field  before 
him  and  wrest  from  him  the  laurels  for  which  he  had  so  long  been 
toiling.  The  last  parts  published  were  vols.  i.  and  ii.  (1874-76), 
which  treat  of  Bible  history.  Before  these  two  volumes  were  written, 
the  author  made  a  journey  to  the  Holy  Land,  to  be  the  better  able  to 

1  Die  Septuaginta  im  Talmud  (1845)  ii.  429,  and  Construction  der  jiidischeii 
Geschichte  (1846),  iii.  81,  121,  361,  413. 

2  Preliminary  sketches  of  his  history,  Jiidische  geschichtliche  Studien,  i.  112, 
156,  192,  307. 

3  Eleven  volumes,  1853-76.  Graetz  published  a  popular  abridged  edition  in 
three  volumes,  Volksthumliche  Geschichte,  1888. 


69 

give  correct  coloring  to  his  work.  In  the  second  and  third  editions 
of  the  individual  volumes,  Graetz  has  tried  to  include  material  pub- 
lished while  he  was  working,  without,  however,  materially  changing 
the  text. 

Graetz  had  the  ability — characteristic  of  the  entire  critical  school 
— to  collect  vast  material,  and  to  master  and  arrange  the  same.  A 
Jew  himself,  he  could  understand  the  conditions  of  his  people  in  the 
past,  could  sympathize  with  them  in  their  suffering,  and  rejoice  in 
their  well-being.  Brought  up  in  the  Jewish  tradition,  he  could,  like 
Jost,  make  use  of  that  tradition  to  the  full  extent.  But  he  had  one 
characteristic  which  Jost  lacked — an  imaginative  temperament. 

His  task  was  rendered  less  difficult  than  Jost's  had  been;  for 
there  was  more  material  upon  which  to  build.  Before  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  scholars  had  published  treatises  on  Jewish 
history ;  and  many  epoch-making  volumes  had  appeared  before  Graetz 
began  his  task.  Due  credit  must  be  given  him  for  the  original  and 
new  material  he  presented.  But  he  has  to  a  large  extent  made  use 
of  the  works  of  others,  which  were  not  always  primary  sources.  By 
accepting  some  of  their  views  without  close  examination  he  has  in- 
corporated errors  into  his  history.  This  is  even  true  of  the  best  of 
his  volumes.1 

When  compared  with  Jost's  histories,  Graetz' s  work  presents  many 
superior  qualities.  First,  Graetz  had  a  better  method  and  a  better 
control  of  his  material.  Being  more  of  a  philosopher  than  Jost, 
Graetz  joined  his  narratives  more  closely  with  a  clearer  study  of  cause 
and  effect,  thereby  producing  a  more  united  and  accurate  whole.  As 
has  already  been  suggested,  Graetz  was  of  a  more  poetic  temperament 
and  gave  to  his  work  the  coloring  of  a  productive  imagination.  Jost 
is  correct  in  saying : a  "  Graetz  began  a  comprehensive  history  with 
surprising  imagination.  But  this  productive  imagination  has  often 
led  him  astray."  His  desire  to  make  history  has  at  times  caused  him 
to  overvalue  things.  For  this  reason  his  history  is  unequal  in  parts. 
In  some  accounts  the  work  is  very  good ;  in  others  he  has  gone  too 
much  into  detail,  so  that  some  parts,  like  the  Reuchlin  and  Pfefferkorn 
contest,  are  unnecessarily  drawn  out. 

Graetz' s  subjective  treatment  of  the  men  he  described  led  him  to 

1  Compare  Zeitschrift  der  deutschen  morgenlandischen  Gesellschajt,  xvi.  291. 

2  Jost,  Geschichte  des  Judenthums,  iii.  304. 


70 

make  errors  which  Jost's  objectiveness  would  hardly  have  committed. 
Graetz  is  either  for  or  against  the  leaders  of  any  movement.  When 
dealing  with  those  with  whom  his  views  are  not  in  sympathy,  and  of 
whose  theories  and  actions  he  disapproves,  his  remarks  become  per- 
sonal. This  is  especially  true  of  the  eleventh  volume,  which  treats 
of  the  Reformed  Judaism  in  Germany.  This  volume  is  not  a  critical 
study  of  men  and  events,  but  an  abuse  of  historical  data.  Criticism 
has  given  way  to  partisan  feeling,  which  has  so  controlled  the  author 
that  his  judgments  are  not  just.1  It  is  a  pity  that  a  man  of  Graetz' s 
ability,  who  could  read  character  as  probably  few  others  could,  should 
have  misused  that  gift  and  have  become  biased  in  his  criticism.  Had 
he  been  less  subjective  in  this  volume,  he  would  have  rid  himself  of 
his  antipathies.  It  might  have  been  greatly  to  the  advantage  of 
Graetz' s  reputation  had  he  never  published  the  eleventh  volume. 

If  we  except  his  last  volume  and  the  first  two,  which  treat  of 
Bible  history  but  present  no  new  material,  and  are,  perhaps,  the 
weakest  part  of  the  History,  the  remaining  eight  contain  critical 
analyses — stamped,  it  is  true,  by  the  author's  personality,  but  scien- 
tific and  thoroughly  honest.  A  feature  of  the  History  that  tends  to 
make  it  very  pleasant  reading  is  its  arrangement.  The  narrative  is 
not  interrupted  by  polemics  or  lengthy  and  scientific  disquisitions  in 
defense  of  the  author's  theories,  or  in  rebuttal  of  those  held  by  others. 
By  relegating  all  such  discussion  to  the  notes,  the  author  has  served 
the  purpose  both  of  the  student  and  of  the  general  reader. 

Besides  being  a  historian,  Graetz  was  an  exegete.  His  Biblical 
criticisms  are  to  be  found  in  the  first  two  volumes  of  his  History, 
begun  in  1871  ;2  in  a  translation  of  and  a  commentary  on  Ecclesi- 
astes  and  The  Song  of  Songs  (1871);  in  a  translation  of  the  Psalms 
(1881);  and  in  a  "Kritischer  Commentar  zu  dem  Psalmen  nebst  Text 
und  Uebersetzungen"  (1882-83),  as  well  as  in  some  minor  contribu- 
tions to  the  "Monatsschrift,"  of  which  he  was  editor  from  1869  to 
1887.  Of  these  exegetical  works,  the  commentary  on  the  Psalms  is 
the  best.  Although  not  a  thorough  Greek  scholar,  Graetz  has  made 
use  of  the  Septuagint  in  his  emendations.  As  an  exegete  he  was  not 
successful;  for  he  was  too  fanciful  and  "permitted  his  zeal  to  run 

1  Cf.  Emanuel  Schreiber's  Graetz's  Geschichtsbauerei,  Berlin,  1881. 

2  It  has  been  suggested  that  Graetz  left  these  two  volumes  to  the  last  in  order 
not  to  incur  the  displeasure  of  the  head  of  the  Breslau  seminary,  and  that  the 
journey  to  Palestine  was  merely  a  pretext  to  conceal  his  real  motive. 


71 

away  with  him  until  he  had  lost  the  solid  ground  from  under  his 
feet.  His  acumen  displayed  and  dissipated  itself  chiefly  in  the  blind- 
ing pyrotechnics  of  rocket-like  emendations." ' 

Graetz  will  be  remembered  only  for  his  historical  studies.  His 
History  has  been  translated  into  French,  English,  and  especially  into 
Hebrew.  In  recognition  of  his  services  to  the  science  of  Judaism, 
on  the  occasion  of  his  seventieth  birthdav,  the  "  Graetz  Jubelschrift  " 
was  published  (Berlin,  1887).  Excepting  the  first  two  and  the  last 
volumes,  his  History  remains  a  valuable  contribution  to  Jewish 
studies;  and,  with  a  few  changes  and  additions  which  the  advance 
of  science  may  render  necessary,  it  will  be  the  standard  work  for  sev- 
eral decades  to  come. 

CHAPTEK  XI 

MORITZ  STEINSCHNEIDER 

The  last  scholar  to  engage  our  attention,  and  who,  after  Zunz,  has 
done  more  than  any  other  scholar  in  Germany  to  promote  the  science 
of  Judaism  and  to  stimulate  investigation,  is  Moritz  Steinschneider. 
This  "  grand  old  man "  of  the  school  of  modern  Jewish  critics,  born 
in  the  second  decade  of  the  nineteenth  century,  still  lives,  and  writes 
with  unabated  vigor.  He  is  one  of  the  marvels  of  the  age,  an  exam- 
ple of  intellectual  fecundity  and  physical  vitality.  The  mere  manual 
labor  of  writing  what  has  come  from  his  pen  would  more  than  occupy 
the  time  of  most  men.  But  to  copiousness  of  production  is  added 
rare  scholarship  and  a  high  degree  of  originality.  There  is  no  greater 
living  authority  on  Hebraica. 

The  biography  of  this  great  scholar  is  to  be  found  in  his  books ; 
for  his  interests  are  centered  in  them.  They  are  his  companions,  and 
they  occupy  his  time  to  the  exclusion  of  all  else.  So  wrapped  up 
is  he  in  them  that  he  is  indifferent  to  all  honors  that  may  be  given 
him.  He  has  taken  comparatively  no  part  in  politics ;  he  has  minis- 
tered to  no  congregation.  He  has  become  known  entirely  through 
his  works.  By  his  zeal  and  earnestness  he  has  given  to  his  contem- 
poraries and  to  f uture  generations  volumes  in  which  the  achievements 
of  his  people  are  recorded  in  plain  but  fitting  and  forcible  language, 

1  Philipp  Bloch,  Memoir  of  H.  Graetz,  in  the  English  edition  of  Graetz's 
History  of  the  Jews,  vol.  vi.  75,  Philadelphia,  1898. 


72 

and  for  which  his  name  will  ever  be  prominent  in  the  history  of 
Jewish  literature. 

Moritz  Steinschneider,  Hebraist,  Arabist,  and  Aramaic  scholar, 
was  born  March  30,  1816,  in  Prossnitz,  Moravia.  His  father,  an 
eminent  Talmudist,  realizing  that  the  one-sided  view  of  most  Jewish 
scholars  was  due  to  their  peculiarly  Jewish  training,  took  great  care 
that  his  son  Moritz  should  not  suffer  in  this  respect,  and  therefore 
gave  him  a  most  liberal  and  sound  education. 

At  the  age  of  six  Steinschneider  was  sent  to  a  Christian  school  in 
Prossnitz,  so  that  his  surroundings  should  not  be  entirely  Jewish  and 
that  he  might  receive  impressions  from  the  outer  world,  of  which  so 
many  Jews  were,  ignorant  or  in  which  they  were  initiated  too  late  to 
prevent  them  from  being  biased.  In  this  respect,  Steinschneider 
started  in  life  with  more  advantages  than  many  of  his  colleagues,  such 
as  Krochmal  and  Eapoport,  who  had  no  school  training  whatsoever. 
He  was  thus  enabled  to  cultivate  a  broader  and  more  tolerant  judg- 
ment. 

His  Hebrew  studies  were  not  neglected,  and  were  indeed  pursued 
with  the  view  of  preparing  him  for  the  ministry.  At  the  age  of 
thirteen  he  attended  the  yeshibah  or  Jewish  college  of  his  native 
city;  in  1832  he  went  to  Nikolsburg  in  order  to  be  with  his  early 
instructor;  and,  later,  he  continued  his  studies  at  Prague  and  Vienna. 
In  1835,  together  with  some  young  enthusiasts,  he  formed  the  bold 
and  very  immature  plan  of  founding  a  Jewish  state  to  which  the 
Jews  of  Germany  and  Austria  should  go.  Though  the  project  was  a 
failure,  it  was  not  entirely  without  results;  and  it  may  be  regarded 
as  in  a  measure  the  precursor  of  the  Zionist  movement  of  the  present 
day.  After  the  society  disbanded,  the  idea  was  fostered  in  England, 
whither  some  of  Steinschneider' s  associates  went,  hoping  to  receive 
among  a  liberal  people  a  more  ready  response  to  their  exhortations. 
Steinschneider  himself  nurtured  his  scheme  for  some  years,  but, 
finally  recognizing  its  futility,  directed  all  his  efforts  to  the  regenera- 
tion of  Israel  by  promoting  the  intellectual  renaissance  that  had  broken 
forth  under  the  guidance  of  men  like  Zunz  and  Eapoport. 

In  Vienna,  where  he  had  hoped  to  find  available  all  resources 
necessary  for  the  continuation  of  his  special  studies,  the  civil  disabil- 
ities placed  upon  Jews  hampered  him  in  his  work.  The  Govern- 
ment, possibly  informed  of  the  design  of  the  expatriation  of  the  Aus- 


73 

trian  Jews,  and  considering  it  advisable  to  be  rid  of  him  as  soon  as 
possible,  ordered  Steinschneider  to  leave  Vienna  as  soon  as  he  had 
completed  his  course  of  study.  Despite  the  many  inconveniences  he 
had  to  undergo  in  Vienna,  and  notwithstanding  the  refusal  of  the 
Government  to  grant  him  special  privileges,  such  as  making  extracts 
from  the  catalogue  of  the  Hebrew  collection  in  the  Imperial  Library,1 
Steinschneider  endeavored  to  make  rapid  strides  in  acquiring  knowl- 
edge. Hebrew,  Arabic,  and  Syriac  were  his  chosen  studies,  and  to 
these  he  directed  all  his  energy.  Seeing  that  there  was  no  chance  of 
advancement  in  Vienna,  he  set  out  for  Berlin,  where  he  hoped  to 
have  more  liberty  to  work.  He,  however,  got  no  further  than  Leipsic ; 
for,  not  having  a  pass,  he  was  compelled  to  remain  there.  This 
enforced  stay  in  Leipsic  was  not  without  its  benefits ;  for  it  brought 
the  energetic  student  in  touch  with  the  University  of  Leipsic,  and 
especially  with  the  well-known  Arabic  scholar,  Fleischer. 

Having  obtained  his  doctorate  from  the  University  and  been  fur- 
nished with  a  pass,  he  resumed  his  journey  to  Berlin  in  1839.  Here 
he  met  Leopold  Zunz,  and  readily  recognized  him  as  his  master. 
Zunz's  influence  on  Steinschneider  must  have  been  considerable;  for 
the  latter  acknowledges  that  the  written  and  personal  communications 
and  the  works  of  Zunz  "  traced  out  the  pathway  leading  to  the  science 
of  Judaism."  His  stay  with  Zunz,  however,  was  short;  for,  in  1842 
he  went  to  Prague,  where  he  had  accepted  a  position  as  teacher  in  a 
girls'  school.  He  returned  to  Berlin  in  1845;  and  there,  with 
occasional  travels  to  various  parts  of  Europe  in  search  of  manuscripts, 
he  has  made  his  home. 

From  1869  to  1890  Steinschneider  was  director  of  the  Jewish 
schoolfor  girls  in  Berlin.  In  1872  he  was  offered  a  chair  at  the 
"Hochschule  fur  die  Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums,"  and  in  1877 
he  was  invited  to  the  Jewish  seminary  at  Budapest,  both  of  which 
offers  he  declined.  Despite  the  importance  of  his  work,  the  Prussian 
Government  was  slow  to  recognize  his  greatness,  and  only  grudgingly 
and  sparingly  bestowed  honors  upon  him.  For  many  years  he  has 
been  head  of  the  Hebrew  department  of  the  Kb'niglische  Bibliothek, 
and  in  1893  was  presented  by  the  Government  with  the  title  of  pro- 
fessor. 

Columbia  University  must  take  a  certain  amount  of  personal 
1  G.  A.  Kohut,  in  American  Hebrew,  1900,  April  13,  p.  699. 


74 

interest  in  him ;  for  on  the  seventieth  anniversary  of  his  birthday 
the  University  conferred  upon  him  the  honorary  degree  of  doctor  of 
laws. 

Since  1838  Steinschneider  has  written  incessantly  in  Hebrew, 
German,  French,  Italian,  and  Latin.  His  works  have  been  so  numer- 
ous that  the  mere  enumeration  of  them  would  fill  many  pages.1  He 
has  written  upon  almost  every  phase  of  Jewish  literature,  and  has 
made  incursions  into  Arabic  and  Syriac  as  well.  He  has  contrib- 
uted to  many  encyclopedias  and  to  numerous  periodicals  dedicated  to 
Orientalia,  mathematics,  and  medicine.  His  articles  treat  of  poetry, 
fables,  homilies,  Talmud,  Haggadah,  philosophy,  metaphysics,  Cabala, 
history,  chronology,  geography,  mathematics,  astronomy,  medicine, 
linguistics,  "  Yolksliteratur,"  and  chess.  He  has  been  translator,  edi- 
tor, and  book  reviewer.  At  one  time  he  proposed  to  edit  a  Jewish 
encyclopedia,  wrote  letters  in  behalf  of  such  an  undertaking,8  and 
with  David  Cassel  even  issued  a  prospectus  of  the  proposed  work. 
Though  the  need  of  such  an  encyclopedia  has  at  all  times  been  urgent, 
it  has  remained  for  American  enterprise  to  bring  such  a  work  to  a 
successful  issue. 

In  reference  to  the  sources  the  bibliographer  has  had  at  his  service, 
the  reader  is  referred  to  the  introduction  of  Steinschneider' s  "  Bibli- 
ographisches  Handbuch,"  1859,  of  his  "Catalogus  Librorum  he- 
brseorum  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,"  1857,  and  of  Fiirst's  "Bibliotheca 
Judaica"  vol.  iii.,  "Vorwort."  It  should,  however,  be  stated  that 
Steinschneider' s  bibliographies  have  excelled  and  supplanted  all  the 
works  of  his  predecessors,  among  the  more  recent  of  whom  are  Johann 
Christian  Wolf,  Dei  Rossi,  and  Julius  Furst. 

Steinschneider' s  reputation  rests  upon  his  bibliographical  works 
and  upon  his  studies  in  Jewish  and  Arabic  literature  and  history. 
Many  of  his  best  articles,  which  are  standard  works  on  Jewish  liter- 
ature, are  to  be  found  scattered  through  the  various  encyclopedias  and 
journals  to  which  he  contributed.  Of  these  the  most  noteworthy  is 
the  article  "  Jiidische  Literatur "  in  the  "  Allgemeine  Encyklopadie 

1  Two  lists  have  been  made :  one  by  Dr.  A.  Berliner  in  his  Schriften  des 
Dr.  Moritz  Steinschneider,  Berlin,  1886;  and  a  more  complete  one,  published  by 
George  A.  Kohut  in  the  Festschrift  zura  achtzigsten  Gebitrstage  Moritz  Stein- 
schneider'1s,  Leipsic,  1896,  which  covers  some  twenty  octavo  pages  of  very  fine  print. 

'Fiirst's  Literaturblatt  des  Orients,  1840,  pp.  465-71,  491-4,  500-4;  and  The 
Jewish  Encyclopedia,  i.,  preface,  p.  xix.,  New  York,  1901. 


75 

der  Wissenschaften  und  Kunste," !  edited  by  Ersch  and  Gruber.  The 
difficulties  that  Steinschneider  encountered  in  writing  this  article 
were  numerous.  The  field  had  been  only  partially  worked.  Further- 
more, as  the  article  was  intended  for  an  encyclopedia,  it  had  to  be 
very  concise,  yet  not  obscure,  and  to  be  confined  to  mere  outlines  so 
as  not  to  trespass  upon  detailed  accounts  the  exposition  of  which  had 
been  assigned  to  other  contributors.  Though  the  article  turned  out 
to  be  much  longer  than  originally  planned,2  the  author  has  in  no 
instance  encroached  on  the  domain  of  his  collaborators.  "  Jlidische 
Literatur  "  was  the  first  attempt  to  present  a  history  of  Jewish  liter- 
ature in  which  every  phase  of  that  literature  should  receive  its  proper 
share  of  attention.  The  method  employed  by  the  author  is  critical; 
his  exposition  is  historical.  Though  much  has  been  written  on 
Jewish  literature  since  its  first  appearance,  though  every  encyclopedia 
contains  some  articles  on  the  subject,  Steinschneider' s  "  Jiidische  Lit- 
eratur "  still  remains  the  authority. 

The  other  great  historico-literary  and  critical  works  that  Stein- 
schneider has  produced  are  "Die  hebraische  Uebersetzungen  des 
Mittelalters  und  die  Juden  als  Dolmetscher :  ein  Beitrag  zur  Literatur- 
geschichte  des  Mittelalters  meist  nach  handschriftlichen  Quellen," 
Berlin,  1893,  and  "Die  arabischen  Uebersetzungen  aus  den  Grie- 
chischen,"  1889-96. 

One  very  remarkable  feature  of  both  works  is  that  they  were  pub- 
lished long  after  the  period  in  life  at  which  most  men  retire  from  a 
literary  career.  Both  works  represent  the  toil  of  more  than  half  a 
century.  The  sources  were  scattered  all  over  Europe,  in  public  and  in 
private  libraries.  To  get  at  these  required  years  of  travel  and  research ; 
and  even  then  much  of  the  necessary  material  was  beyond  Stein- 
schneider's  reach.  Happily,  good  fellowship  was  an  inherent  quality 
of  this  band  of  students,  and  each  was  ready  at  a  moment's  call  to 
render  his  fellow  laborer  assistance  and  to  furnish  all  the  information 

1  Section  2,  vol.  xxvii.  357-359.  This  article  has  been  translated  into  Eng- 
lish by  William  Spottiswood,  under  the  title  Jewish  Literature  from  the  Eighth 
to  the  Eighteenth  Century;  with  an  Introduction  on 'Talmud  and  Midrash,  Lon- 
don, 1857.  An  index  to  the  article  was  made  by  Steinschneider  and  published  at 
Frankfort-on-the-Main,  1893.  A  Hebrew  translation  was  made  by  Hirsch  Maltar, 
Warsaw,  1897. 

2  The  English  translation  covers  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifty  octavo 
pages,  not  including  notes  and  indices. 


76 

that  was  needed.  In  this  way  the  Northern  Jewish  scholars  received 
information  of  manuscripts  in  the  libraries  of  the  South,  and  vice  versa. 
As  Zunz  had  received  data  from  Luzzatto  and  from  others  in  all  parts 
of  Europe,  so  also  was  Steinschneider  assisted  in  his  "Ueberset- 
zungen  "  by  the  willing  hands  and  brains  of  his  peers.  Both  these 
contributions  were  prize  essays  submitted  to  the  French  Acad^mie 
des  Inscriptions  et  Belles-lettres,  which  fact  of  itself  is  a  testimony 
to  their  great  value.  In  1880  the  Acade'mie  offered  a  prize  for  the 
best  essay  on  the  theme,  "Faire  1' Enumeration  compl.  et  systemat. 
des  traductions  h^braiques  qui  ont  6t6  faites  au  moyen-^ge,  d'ouvrage 
de  philosophie  et  de  sciences  grecs,  arabes,  ou  meme  latins," '  and  in 
1882  offered  another  prize  on  the  subject,  "Relever  sur  .  .  .  le 
Fihrist  toutes  les  traductions  d'ouvrages  en  arabe;  critiquer  ces 
donnEes  bibliographiques  d'apres  les  documents  imprimis  et  manu- 
scrits." a  In  response  Steinschneider  wrote  two  separate  dissertations 
in  French,  and  later  translated  them  into  German.  Of  the  two,  "Die 
hebraische  Uebersetzungen  des  Mittelalters  "  is  the  better  known  and 
more  generally  consulted.  The  other,  "Die  Arabischen  Ueberset- 
zungen," was  never  published  separately,  but  was  printed  in  three 
parts  in  various  periodicals.3  Of  these  two  dissertations  the  "Heb- 
raische Uebersetzungen "  alone  is  of  immediate  interest  for  our  present 
study  of  the  work  done  in  Jewish  history  and  literature  during  the 
nineteenth  century.  The  "  Hebraische  Uebersetzungen "  treats  of 
translations  made  by  the  Jews  of  the  Middle  Ages  from  Arabic, 
Greek,  Latin,  and,  to  a  less  extent,  from  modern  languages. 

Steinschneider  claims  that  translations  were  made  at  a  very  early 
date,  much  earlier  than  most  students  are  aware.  It  is  true  that  the 
greatest  activity  of  the  Jewish  translations  occurred  in  the  twelfth 
century.  But  long  before  that  time,  the  desire  was  felt  to  become 
acquainted  with  thought  expressed  in  a  language  unknown  to  most 
Jews.  To  this  desire  we  owe  translations  from  the  Greek,  a  study 
of  which  was  stimulated  by  contact  with  Greek  thought  through 

1  Kohut,  Bibliography  of  Steinschneider's  writings  in  Festschrift,  1896, 
p.  xi.  2  Ibid. 

3  The  introduction  was  published  in  the  Centralblatt  fur  Bibliothekswesen, 
1889,  vii.  51-85;  chap.  i.  was  published  under  the  title  Philosophie,  ibid.,  1893, 
xii.  129-240;  chap.  ii.  in  Zeitschrift  der  deutschen  morgenlandischen  Gesellschaft, 
1896 ;  chap.  iii.  Medicine,  in  Virchow's  Archiv,  1891,  cxxiv.  115-36 ;  268-96, 
455-87. 


77 

Arabic  sources.  Translations  were  also  made  from  the  works  of 
Arabs,  of  Jews  who  wrote  in  other  languages  than  Hebrew,  and  of 
Christians,  as  well  as  from  many  anonymous  compositions.  Not 
only  were  religious  treatises  translated,  but  books  on  medicine,  phi- 
losophy, fables,  and  astronomy  were  rendered  from  one  language  into 
another.  No  matter  how  low  the  political  and  social  condition  of 
the  Jews  may  have  been  during  the  Middle  Ages,  their  intellectual 
standing  was  always  of  a  comparatively  high  degree. 

The  "Hebraische  Uebersetzungen "  is  arranged  according  to  the 
subject-matter  with  which  the  translations  deal:  philosophy,  mathe- 
matics, medicine,  etc.  The  author  has  been  very  careful  to  give 
detailed  information  in  regard  to  biographical  and  bibliographical 
data,  to  the  commentaries  and  supercommentaries  made  upon  the 
translations.  In  1,077  pages  the  author  has  traced,  more  clearly  than 
it  had  ever  been  traced  before,  the  part  taken  by  the  Jews  in  the 
development  of  culture  in  Europe  and  in  the  renaissance  of  learning. 
He  has  showed  how  the  Jew  has  acted  the  part  of  mediator  between 
Europe  on  the  one  hand,  and  Greek  and  Arabic  thought  on  the  other. 

Though  the  "  Judische  Literatur "  and  the  "  Hebraische  Ueberset- 
zungen  "  are  to  be  placed  among  the  best  of  Steinschneider's  works, 
his  greatest  achievements  are  his  catalogues.  He  is  par  excellence 
the  bibliographer  of  this  school.  To  his  exertions  we  owe  cata- 
logues of  collections  of  Jewish  books  and  manuscripts  in  some  of  the 
most  important  libraries  of  Europe  and  in  many  private  collections. 
The  most  valuable  of  these  are  the  "Catalogus  Librorum  hebraeorum 
in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,"  1852-69;  "Conspectus  Codicum  hebrae- 
orum Bibliothecse  Academise  Lugduno-Batavae,"  1858;  "Die  Hebrii- 
ischen  Handschriften  der  K.  Hof-  und  Staatsbibliothek  in  Munchen," 
1875;  2d  ed.  1895-96;  "Catalog  der  hebraischen  Handschriften  in 
der  Stadtbibliothek  zu  Hamburg  und  der  sich  anschliessenden  in 
anderen  Sprachen,"  1878.  Of  these  catalogues,  that  of  the  Bodleian 
Library  is  one  of  the  greatest  works  that  any  Jewish  scholar  of  the 
century  has  produced.  It  is  a  storehouse  of  information;  dealing 
with  those  authors  that  have  made  Jewish  literature,  and  treating 
of  them  in  alphabetical  order. 

Steinschneider  has  also  edited  the  "Hebraische  Bibliographie" 
(1858-65,  1869-1881),  a  journal  treating  on  Jewish  literature  in  all 
its  various  branches. 


78 

The  mere  manual  work  required  of  the  author  in  the  production 
of  Steinschneider's  books,  especially  his  catalogues,  is  almost  in- 
credible :  the  value  of  the  works  themselves  to  the  student  of  Jewish 
history  and  literature  cannot  be  overestimated.  He  has  treated, 
briefly  yet  as  exhaustively  as  his  sources  would  permit,  all  Jewish 
authors;  he  has  given  their  biographies,  the  editions  of  their  works, 
and  has  shown  the  relative  importance  of  each  writer. 

Most  of  Steinschneider's  works  were  not  written  for  a  reading 
public,  nor  were  they  intended  to  be  read  continuously  by  the  student. 
They  are  mainly  reference  books,  veritable  encyclopedias  of  Jewish 
literature  and  Jewish  culture  in  general,  indispensable  alike  for  the 
student  and  the  scholar. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

In  addition  to  the  works  of  the  authors  treated  in  this  dissertation  the 
undermentioned  books  and  articles  have  been  consulted : 

General  References 

Cassel,  D.  Lehrbuch  derjUdischen  Geschichte  und  Literatur,  Leipsic, 
1879. 

Geiger,  A.  JUdische  Geschichte  von  1830  bis  zur  Gegenwart,  in  Geiger's 
Nachgelassene  Schriften,  ii.  246-273,  Berlin,  1875. 

Goldenthal,  I.  Die  neueste  Schule  in  der  jUdischen  Literatur,  in  Sit- 
zungsberichte  der  Wiener  Akademie,  1853,  ix.  306. 

Graetz,  H.  Geschichte  der  Juden,  11  vols.,  1853-1876.,  Translation  edited 
by  the  Jewish  Publication  Society  of  America,  5  vols. ,  Philadelphia, 
1891-98. 

Jost,  I.  M.  Neuere  Geschichte  der  Israeliten  von  1815  bis  1855,  Berlin, 
1846-47 ;  idem,  Geschichte  des  Judenthums  und  seiner  Sekten, 
1857-59. 

Karpeles,  G.     Geschichte  der  judischen  Literatur,  Berlin,  1886. 

Kayserling,  M.  Die  JUdische  Literatur  von  Moses  Mendelssohn  bis 
auf  die  Gegenwart,  in  vol.  iii.  of  Die  jiidische  Literatur,  edited  by 
Winter  and  Wunsche,  Treves,  1896. 

Hitter,  I.  H.     Geschichte  der  jiidischen  Reformation,  Berlin,  1858. 

Schach,  F.     Eine  auferstandene  Sprache,  Berlin,  n.  d. 

Steinschneider,  M.  Catalogus  Librorum  hebraiorum  in  Bibliotheca 
Bodleiana,  Berlin,  1852-60 ;  idem,  Jewish  Literature,  London,  1857. 

Weiss,  I.  H.     Zikronotai,  Warsaw,  1895. 

Weissberg.  Neuhebraische  Aufklarungs-Literatur,  Leipsic  and  Vien- 
na, 1898. 

Zeitlin,  William.  Bibliotheca  hebraica  post-Mendelssohniana,  Leip- 
sic, 1891-95. 

Galician  School 

NACHMAN  KROCHMAL : 

Anonymous,  in  Jost's  Israelitische  Annalen,  1840,  p.  301. 

Hein,  M.    Drei  Forscher  der  neuesten  Zeit,  in  Monatsschrift,   1889, 

pp.  315,  337,  378,  406. 
Letteris,  M.    Introduction  to  the  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman,  2d  edition, 

1863. 


80 

Rapoport,  S.  J.     Eulogy  on  Krochmal,  in  Kerem  Hemed,  iv.  4. 
Schechter,  S.     Studies  in  Judaism,  Philadelphia,  1896,  pp.  46  et  seq. ; 

idem,  Rabbi  Nachman  Krochmal :  a  paper  read  before  the  Jews' 

College  Literary  Society,  Jan.  23,  1887,  London,  1887. 
Zunz,  L.    Introduction  to  the  Moreh  Nebuke  ha-Zeman,  2d  edition, 

1863;  idem,  Nekrolog  N.  Krochmal s  in  his  Gesammelte  Schriften,  ii. 

150  et  seq. 

S.   J.   RAPOPORT: 

Bernfeld,  S.  Toledot  Shir,  1900  ;  idem,  A  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  Rapo- 
port, in  Ahiasaf,  1900,  p.  349. 

Brann,  M.  Die  Familie  Rapoport;  in  Das  Centenarium  S.  J.  L. 
RapoporVs  {Festgabe  der  oesterreichischen  Wochenschrift,  June 
I,  1900),  Vienna. 

Buchler,  Alex.  Die  Wahi  RapoporVs  in  Prag  und  Solomon  Ro- 
senthal, ibid. 

Carmoly,  Eliakim.    Ha-Orevim  u-Bene  Yonah,  Rodelheim,  1861. 

Epstein,  Abraham.    Dibre  Bikkoret,  Cracow,  1896. 

Geiger,  A.  Edward  Kiev  und  S.  L.  Rapoport,  in  Geiger's  Jildische 
Zeitschrift,  v.  241. 

Grun,  Nathan.  S.  L.  R.  und  seine  Bibliothek,  in  Das  Centenarium 
RapoporVs,  Vienna,  June  1,  1900. 

Halberstam,  S.  J.  and  Kaufmann,  D.  S.  L.  RapoporVs  Schriften, 
Bibliographisch  verzeichnet,  in  Das  Centenarium  RapoporVs, 
Vienna,  June  1,  1900. 

Kaufmann,  D.  Eine  Festbetrachtung,  in  Das  Centenarium  Rapo- 
porVs, Vienna,  June  1,  1900. 

Kurlander,  A.    Biographie  S.  L.  RapoporVs,  Pest,  1899. 

Libowitch,  N.  G.     Iggeret  Bikkoret,  New  York,  1896. 

Reifman,  Jacob.  Genealogy  of  Rapoport,  in  Smolenski's  Ha-Shahar, 
iii.  353  et  seq. 

Rosin,  D.  Erinnerungen  an  S.  L.  R.,  in  Das  Centenarium  Rapo- 
porVs, Vienna,  June  1,  1900. 

Steinschneider,  M.      Gegenwart,  1867,  i.  338. 

Zunz,  L.     Gottesdienstliche  Vortrage  2d  edition,  1892,  p.  xiii. 

Italian  School 

I.   S,    REGGIO: 

Goldenthal,  I.,  in  Philippson's  Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums, 

Beiblatt  No.  35,  pp.  160,  228. 
Levinson,  I.  B.     Jehoshaphat,  Warsaw,  1884. 
Libowitch,  N.  G.    Iggeret  Bikkoret,  p.  13,  New  York,  1896. 

S.   D.    LUZZATTO  : 

Bernfeld,  S.  A  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  Luzzatto,  in  Ahiasaf,  1900, 
p.  332. 


81 

Elbogon,  J.    S.  D.  Luzzatto>8  Stellung  zur  Bibelkritik,  in  Monats- 

schrift,  October,  1900,  p.  460. 
Geiger,  A.,  in  JUdische  Zeitschrift fur  Wissenschaft  und  Leben,  1863, 

ii.  270-275  ;  1866,  iv.  1-21 ;  v.  142. 

German  School 

LEOPOLD  ZUNZ: 

Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,  1891,  p.  44 ;  1895,  pp.  54,  236. 

Berliner,  A.  Paid  de  Lagarde,  nach  seiner  Natur  gezeichnet,  Berlin, 
1887. 

Chotzner,  J.  Ot  Zikkaron,  Toledot  Rabbi  Yom-Tob  Lipman  Zunz, 
Berlin,  1891. 

Gaster,  M.  Catalogue  of  Zunz  Miscellanea.  Appendix  to  Judith  Mon- 
tefiore  College  Report  for  1891-92,  London,  1892. 

Geiger,  A.,  in  Nachgelassene  Schriften,  i.  296. 

Karpeles,  G.  Jewish  Literature  and  Other  Essays,  p.  318,  Philadel- 
phia, 1895. 

Kaufmann,  D.  Paul  de  Lagarde' s  judische  Gelehrsamkeit,ljeipsic,1887; 
idem,  L.  Zunz,  in  Allgemeine  deutsche  Biographie,  1900,  xlv.  490. 

Lagarde,  Paul  de.    Lipman  Zunz  und  seine  Verehre,  Gottingen,  1886. 

Maybaum,  S.  Ausdem  Leben  von  Leopold  Zunz,  Berlin,  1894.  Zivolfter 
Bericht  uber  die  Lehranstalt  fur  die  Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums 
in  Berlin. 

Monatsschrift  fur  Geschichte  des  Judenthums,  xxxviii.  No.  11  con- 
tains articles  on  Zunz  by  Kaufmann,  Brann,  Rosin,  and  Theodor. 

Rabbinowitz,  S.  P.    Rabbi  Yom-Tob  Lipman  Zunz,  Warsaw,  1896. 

Steinschneider,  M.  Preface  to  the  second  edition  of  the  Gottesdienst- 
liche  Vortrdge,  1892,  p.  xiv. 

Techen,  Ludwig.  Zwei  Gottinger  Machzorhandschriften,  Gottingen, 
1884. 

Weiss,  I.  H.  Leopold  Zunz,  in  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  April,  1885, 
p  365.  This  article  is  a  translation  of  the  section  of  I.  H  Weiss's  Zik- 
ronotai  treating  on  Zunz. 

ABRAHAM  GEIGER: 

Schreiber,  Emanuel.  The  Greatest  Reform  Rabbi  of  the  19th  Cen- 
tury, Spokane,  Washington,  1892. 

ZACH ARIAS  FRANKEL: 

Beer,  B.,  in  Zeitschrift  der  deutschen  morgenldndischen  Gesellschaft, 

1860,  xiv.  323. 
Brann.     Jahrbuch  zurBelehrung  und  Unterhaltung,  1898,  p.  100. 
Perles,  in  Allgemeine  deutsche  Biographie,  1878,  vii.  266. 

6 


82 


I.  M.  JOST  : 

Bernfeld,  S.    A  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  Jost,  in  Ahiasaf,  1900,  p.  341. 

Brann,  M.     Jahrbuch  zur  Belehrung  und  TJnterhaltung,  1893,  p.  15. 

Brull,  in  Allgemeine  deutsche  Biographie,  1881,  xiv.  577. 

Friedenthal.  I.  M.  Jost:  Eine  Biographische  Skizze,  in  Kleinsche 
Jahrbuch,  1844,  pp.  77  et  seq. 

Stein's  Volkslehrer,  1860,  pp.  241,  337. 

Steinschneider,  M.  Introduction  to  his  Bibliographisches  Hand- 
wort  erbuch  ficr  hebraische  Sprachkunde,  Leipsic,  1859. 

Zirndorf.     Marcus  Jost  und  seine  Freunde,  Cincinnati,  1886. 

HEINRICH  GRAETZ: 

Abrahams,  Israel.  The  Writings  of  Prof.  Graetz  (Bibliography),  in 
Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  1891-92,  iv.  194 ;  idem,  H  Graetz,  the 
Jewish  Historian,  in  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  iv.  165. 

Bloch,  Ph.  Memoir  of  H  Graetz,  in  vol.  vi.  of  the  English  transla- 
tion of  Graetz's  Geschichte  der  Juden,  Philadelphia,  1898. 

Kaufmann,  D.,  in  Brann's  Jahrbuch  zur  Belehrung  und  TJnterhal- 
tung, 1893,  p.  3. 

Schreiber,  Emanuel.     Graetz's  Geschichtsbauerei,  Berlin,  1881. 

MORITZ  STEINSCHNEIDER  : 

Kohut,  G.  A.  Moritz  Steinschneider,  in  American  Hebrew,  lxvi.  633, 
680,  699  ;  Ixvii.  173,  397.  Bibliography  of  the  writings  of  Dr.  Moritz 
Steinschneider,  in  Festschrift  zum  achtzigsten  Gebur stage  Moritz 
Steinschneider*' s,  pp.  v.-xxxix.,  Leipsic,  1896. 


OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY 

of 


-QNI^-RRSI*^ 


